Republic of the Philippines Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT Manila Manila EN BANC EN BANC G.R.
G.R. No. No. 148334 148334 January January 21, 21, 20042004
ARTURO M. TOLENTINO an ARTURO C. MOJICA,
ARTURO M. TOLENTINO an ARTURO C. MOJICA, Petitioners,Petitioners,
vs. vs.
COMMISSION ON
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, SENATOELECTIONS, SENATOR RALP! R RALP! G. RECTO an G. RECTO an SENATSENATOROR GREGORIO B. !ONASAN,
GREGORIO B. !ONASAN, Respondents.Respondents.
D E C I S I O D E C I S I O NN CARPIO, CARPIO, J.: J.: The Case The Case
This is a petition for prohibition to set aside Resolution No. NC
This is a petition for prohibition to set aside Resolution No. NC !"#!!$ dated $ %une &!"#!!$ dated $ %une &!!"!!" '(Resolution No. !"#!!$() and Resolution No. NC !"#!!* dated &! %ul+ &!!" '(Resolution No. '(Resolution No. !"#!!$() and Resolution No. NC !"#!!* dated &! %ul+ &!!" '(Resolution No. !"#!!*() of respondent Coission on Elections '(COME-EC(). Resolution No. !"#!!$
!"#!!*() of respondent Coission on Elections '(COME-EC(). Resolution No. !"#!!$
proclaied the " candidates elected as Senators in the "/ Ma+ &!!" elections 0hile Resolution proclaied the " candidates elected as Senators in the "/ Ma+ &!!" elections 0hile Resolution No. !"#!!* declared (official and final( the ran1in2 of the " Senators proclaied in Resolution No. !"#!!* declared (official and final( the ran1in2 of the " Senators proclaied in Resolution No. !"#!!$.
No. !"#!!$.
The 3acts The 3acts
Shortl+ after her succession to the Presidenc+ in %anuar+ &!!", President 4loria Macapa2al# Shortl+ after her succession to the Presidenc+ in %anuar+ &!!", President 4loria Macapa2al# 5rro+o noinated then
5rro+o noinated then Senator TeofiSenator Teofisto T. 4uin2ona, %r. '(Senator 4uin2ona() as sto T. 4uin2ona, %r. '(Senator 4uin2ona() as 6i6ice#ce# President. Con2ress confired the noination of Senator 4uin2ona
President. Con2ress confired the noination of Senator 4uin2ona 0ho too1 his oath as 6ice#0ho too1 his oath as 6ice# President on 7 3ebruar+ &!!".
President on 7 3ebruar+ &!!".
3ollo0in2 Senator 4uin2ona8s confiration, the Senate on 9 3ebruar+ &!!" passed Resolution 3ollo0in2 Senator 4uin2ona8s confiration, the Senate on 9 3ebruar+ &!!" passed Resolution No. 9/ '(Resolution No. 9/() certif+in2 to the e:istence of a vacanc+ in the Senate. Resolution No. 9/ '(Resolution No. 9/() certif+in2 to the e:istence of a vacanc+ in the Senate. Resolution No. 9/ called on COME-EC to fill the vacanc+ throu2h a special election to be held
No. 9/ called on COME-EC to fill the vacanc+ throu2h a special election to be held
siultaneousl+ 0ith the re2ular elections on "/ Ma+ &!!". T0elve Senators, 0ith a *#+ear ter siultaneousl+ 0ith the re2ular elections on "/ Ma+ &!!". T0elve Senators, 0ith a *#+ear ter each, 0ere due to be elected in that election
each, 0ere due to be elected in that election.."" Resolution No. 9/ further provided Resolution No. 9/ further provided that thethat the
(Senatorial candidate 2arnerin2 the "th
(Senatorial candidate 2arnerin2 the "th hi2hest nuber of votes shall serve onl+ for thehi2hest nuber of votes shall serve onl+ for the une:pired ter of
une:pired ter of forer Senator Teofiforer Senator Teofisto T. 4uin2ona, %rsto T. 4uin2ona, %r.,( 0hich ends on .,( 0hich ends on ! %une &!! %une &!!/.!/.&&
On $ %une &!!",
On $ %une &!!", after COME-EC had canvassed the election results fro all the pafter COME-EC had canvassed the election results fro all the provinces butrovinces but one '-anao del Norte), COME-EC issued Resolution No. !"#!!$ provisionall+ proclaiin2 " one '-anao del Norte), COME-EC issued Resolution No. !"#!!$ provisionall+ proclaiin2 " candidates as the elected Senators. Resolution No.
'"&) Senators shall serve for a ter of si: '*) +ears and the thirteenth '"th) Senator shall serve the une:pired ter of three ') +ears of Senator Teofisto T. 4uin2ona, %r. 0ho 0as appointed 6ice#President.( Respondents Ralph Recto '(Recto() and 4re2orio ;onasan '(;onasan() ran1ed
"&th and "th, respectivel+, in Resolution No. !"#!!$.
On &! %une &!!", petitioners 5rturo Tolentino and 5rturo Mo<ica '(petitioners(), as voters and ta:pa+ers, filed the instant petition for prohibition, ipleadin2 onl+ COME-EC as respondent. Petitioners sou2ht to en<oin COME-EC fro proclaiin2 0ith finalit+ the candidate for Sen ator receivin2 the "th hi2hest nuber of votes as the 0inner in the special election for a sin2le three# +ear ter seat. 5ccordin2l+, petitioners pra+ed for the nullification of Resolution No. !"#!!$ in so far as it a1es a proclaation to such effect.
Petitioners contend that COME-EC issued Resolution No. !"#!!$ 0ithout <urisdiction because= '") it failed to notif+ the electorate of the position to be filled in the special election as re>uired under Section & of Republic 5ct No. **/$ '(R.5. No. **/$()?/ '&) it failed to re>uire senatorial
candidates to indicate in their certificates of candidac+ 0hether the+ see1 election under the special or re2ular elections as alle2edl+ re>uired under Section @ of atas Pabansa l2. 99"?$
and, conse>uentl+, ') it failed to specif+ in the 6oters Inforation Sheet the candidates see1in2 election under the special or re2ular senatorial elections as purportedl+ re>uired under Section /, para2raph / of Republic 5ct No. **/* '(R.5. No. **/*().*
P"#$#$on"r% a #&a# '"(au%" o) #&"%" o*$%%$on%, COMELEC (an+a%%" a #&" +o#"% (a%# )or #&" %"na#or$a (an$a#"% $n #&" 14 May 2001 ""(#$on% -$#&ou# $%#$n(#$on %u(& #&a# #&"r" -"r" no #-o %"/ara#" S"na#" ""(#$on% &" %$*u#an"ou%y 'u# u%# a %$n" ""(#$on )or #&$r#""n %"a#%, $rr"%/"(#$+" o) #"r*. @
S#a#" o#&"r-$%", /"#$#$on"r% (a$* #&a# $) &" %$*u#an"ou%y, a %/"($a an a r"uar ""(#$on *u%# '" $%#$nu$%&" $n #&" o(u*"n#a#$on a% -" a% $n #&" (an+a%%$n o) #&"$r r"%u#%. To %u//or# #&"$r (a$*, /"#$#$on"r% ($#" #&" %/"($a ""(#$on% %$*u#an"ou%y &" -$#& #&" r"uar ""(#$on% o) 13 No+"*'"r 11 an 8 No+"*'"r 1 #o )$ #&" %"a#%
+a(a#" 'y S"na#or% "rnano Lo/"5 an Caro% P. Gar($a, r"%/"(#$+"y, -&o '"(a*" 6$("7 Pr"%$"n#% ur$n #&"$r #"nur"% $n #&" S"na#".9 Petitioners point out that in those elections,
COME-EC separatel+ canvassed the votes cast for the senatorial candidates runnin2 under the re2ular elections fro the votes cast for the candidates runnin2 under the special elections. COME-EC also separatel+ proclaied the 0inners in each of those elections.7
Petitioners sou2ht the issuance of a teporar+ restrainin2 order durin2 the pendenc+ of their petition.
Aithout issuin2 an+ restrainin2 order, 0e re>uired COME-EC to Coent on the petition. On &! %ul+ &!!", after COME-EC had canvassed the results fro all the provinces, it issued Resolution No. !"#!!* declarin2 (official and final( the ran1in2 of the " Senators proclaied in Resolution No. !"#!!$. The " Senators too1 their oaths of office on & %ul+ &!!".
In vie0 of the issuance of Resolution No. !"#!!*, the Court re>uired petitioners to file an aended petition ipleadin2 Recto and ;onasan as additional respondents. Petitioners accordin2l+ filed an aended petition in 0hich the+ reiterated the contentions raised in their ori2inal petition and, in addition, sou2ht the nullification of Resolution No. !"#!!*.
In their Coents, COME-EC, ;onasan, and Recto all clai that a special election to fill the seat vacated b+ Senator 4uin2ona 0as validl+ held on "/ Ma+ &!!". COME-EC and ;onasan further raise preliinar+ issues on the ootness of the petition and on petitioners8 standin2 to liti2ate. ;onasan also clais that the petition, 0hich see1s the nullit+ of his proclaation as Senator, is actuall+ a >uo 0arranto petition and the Court should disiss the sae for lac1 of <urisdiction. 3or his part, Recto, as the "&th ran1in2 Senator, contends he is not a proper part+ to
this case because the petition onl+ involves the validit+ of the proclaation of the "th placer in the "/ Ma+ &!!" senatorial elections.
The Issues The follo0in2 are the issues presented for resolution=
'") Procedurall+ B
'a) 0hether the petition is in fact a petition for >uo 0arranto over 0hich the Senate Electoral Tribunal is the sole <ud2e?
'b) 0hether the petition is oot? and
'c) 0hether petitioners have standin2 to liti2ate.
'&) On the erits, 0hether a special election to fill a vacant three#+ear ter Senate seat 0as validl+ held on "/ Ma+ &!!".
The Rulin2 of the Court The petition has no erit. On the Preliinar+ Matters
The Nature of the Petition and the Court8s %urisdiction
5 >uo 0arranto proceedin2 is, aon2 others, one to deterine the ri2ht of a public officer in the e:ercise of his office and to oust hi fro its en<o+ent if his clai is no t 0ell#founded."! nder
Section "@, 5rticle 6I of the Constitution, the Senate Electoral Tribunal is the sole <ud2e of all contests relatin2 to the >ualifications of the ebers of the Senate.
5 perusal of the alle2ations contained in the instant petition sho0s, ho0ever, that 0hat petitioners are >uestionin2 is the validit+ of the special election on "/ Ma+ &!!" in 0hich
;onasan 0as elected. Petitioners8 various pra+ers are, nael+= '") a (declaration( that no special election 0as held siultaneousl+ 0ith the 2eneral elections on "/ Ma+ &!!"? '&) to en<oin
COME-EC fro declarin2 an+one as havin2 0on in the special election? and ') to annul Resolution Nos. !"#!!$ and !"#!!* in so far as these Resolutions proclai ;onasan as the
0inner in the special election. Petitioners anchor their pra+ers on COME-EC8s alle2ed failure to copl+ 0ith certain re>uireents pertainin2 to the conduct of that special election. Clearl+ then, the petition does not see1 to deterine ;onasan8s ri2ht in the e:ercise of his office as Senator. Petitioners8 pra+er for the annulent of ;onasan8s proclaation and, ultiatel+, election is erel+ incidental to petitioners8 cause of action. Conse>uentl+, the Court can properl+ e:ercise <urisdiction over the instant petition.
On the Mootness of the Petition
COME-EC contends that its proclaation on $ %une &!!" of the " Senators and its subse>uent confiration on &! %ul+ &!!" of the ran1in2 of the " Senators render the instant petition to set aside Resolutions Nos. !"#!!$ and !"#!!* oot and acadeic.
5dittedl+, the office of the 0rit of prohibition is to coand a tribunal or board to desist fro coittin2 an act threatened to be done 0ithout <urisdiction or 0ith 2rave abuse of discretion aountin2 to lac1 or e:cess of <urisdiction.""Conse>uentl+, the 0rit 0ill not lie to en<oin acts
alread+ done."& ;o0ever, as an e:ception to the rule on ootness, courts 0ill decide a >uestion
other0ise oot if it is capable of repetition +et evadin2 revie0." Thus, in 5lunan III v. Mirasol,"/
0e too1 co2niance of a petition to set aside an order cancelin2 the 2eneral elections for the San22unian2 abataan '(S() on / Deceber "77& despite that at the tie the petition 0as filed, the S election had alread+ ta1en place. Ae noted inAunan that since the >uestion of the
validit+ of the order sou2ht to be annulled (is li1el+ to arise in ever+ S elections and +et the >uestion a+ not be decided before the date of such elections,( the ootness of the petition is no bar to its resolution. This observation s>uarel+ applies to the instant case. The >uestion of the
validit+ of a special election to fill a vacanc+ in the Senate in relation to COME-EC8s failure to copl+ 0ith re>uireents on the conduct of such special election is li1el+ to arise in ever+ such election. Such >uestion, ho0ever, a+ not be decided before the date of the election.
On Petitioners8 Standin2
;onasan >uestions petitioners8 standin2 to brin2 the instant petition a s ta:pa+ers and voters because petitioners do not clai that COME-EC ille2all+ disbursed public funds. Neither do petitioners clai that the+ sustained personal in<ur+ because of the issuance of Resolution Nos.
!"#!!$ and !"#!!*.
(-e2al standin2( or locus standi refers to a personal and substantial interest in a case such that the part+ has sustained or 0ill sustain direct in<ur+ because of the challen2ed 2overnental act."$
The re>uireent of standin2, 0hich necessaril+ (sharpens the presentation of issues,("* relates to
the constitutional andate that this Court settle onl+ actual cases or controversies."@ Thus,
2enerall+, a part+ 0ill be allo0ed to liti2ate onl+ 0hen '") he can sho0 that he has personall+ suffered soe actual or threatened in<ur+ because of the alle2edl+ ille2al conduct of the
2overnent? '&) the in<ur+ is fairl+ traceable to the challen2ed action? and ') the in<ur+ is li1el+ to be redressed b+ a favorable action."9
A//$" %#r$(#y, #&" o(#r$n" o) %#an$n #o $#$a#" -$ $n"" 'ar #&" $n%#an# /"#$#$on. In u"%#$on$n, $n #&"$r (a/a($#y a% +o#"r%, #&" +a$$#y o) #&" %/"($a ""(#$on on 14 May 2001, /"#$#$on"r% a%%"r# a &ar* (a%%$)$" a% a "n"ra$5" r$"+an(". T&$% "n"ra$5"
r$"+an(" $% %&ar" $n %u'%#an#$ay "ua *"a%ur" 'y a ar" (a%% o) +o#"r%, $) no# a #&" +o#"r%, -&o +o#" $n #&a# ""(#$on."7 Neither have petitioners alle2ed, in their capacit+ as
ta:pa+ers, that the Court should 2ive due course to the petition because in the special election held on "/ Ma+ &!!" (ta: one+ F0asG H: : : e:tracted and spent in violation of specific
constitutional protections a2ainst abuses of le2islative po0er8 or that there F0asG isapplication of such funds b+ COME-EC or that public one+ F0asG deflected to an+ iproper purpose.(&!
On the other hand, 0e have rela:ed the re>uireent on standin2 and e:ercised our discretion to 2ive due course to voters8 suits involvin2 the ri2ht of suffra2e.&" 5lso, in the recent case of
In#"ra#" Bar o) #&" P&$$//$n"% +. 9a*ora,&& 0e 2ave the sae liberal treatent to a petition
filed b+ the Inte2rated ar of the Philippines '(IP(). The IP >uestioned the validit+ of a Presidential directive deplo+in2 eleents of the Philippine National Police and the Philippine Marines in Metro Manila to conduct patrols even thou2h the IP presented (too 2eneral an interest.( Ae held=
FTGhe IP priaril+ anchors its standin2 on its alle2ed responsibilit+ to uphold the rule of la0 and the Constitution. 5part fro this declaration, ho0ever, the IP asserts no other basis in support of its locus standi. The ere invocation b+ the IP of its dut+ to preserve the rule of la0 and nothin2 ore, 0hile undoubtedl+ true, is not sufficient to clothe it 0ith standin2 in this case. This is too 2eneral an interest 0hich is shared b+ other 2roups and the 0hole citienr+ : : :. ;avin2 stated the fore2oin2, this Court has the discretion to ta1e co2niance of a suit 0hich does not satisf+ the re>uireent of le2al standin2 0hen paraount interest is involved. In not a fe0 cases, the court has adopted a liberal attitude on the locus standi of a petitioner 0here the petitioner is able to craft an issue of transcendental si2nificance to the people. Thus, 0hen the
issues raised are of paraount iportance to the public, the Court a+ brush aside technicalities of procedure. In this case, a readin2 of the petition sho0s that the IP has advanced
constitutional issues 0hich deserve the attention of this Court in vie0 of their seriousness, novelt+ and 0ei2ht as precedents. Moreover, because peace and order are under constant threat and la0less violence occurs in increasin2 tepo, undoubtedl+ a22ravated b+ the Mindanao insur2enc+ proble, the le2al controvers+ raised in the petition alost certainl+ 0ill not 2o a0a+. It 0ill stare us in the face a2ain. It, therefore, behooves the Court to rela: the rules on standin2 and to resolve the issue no0, rather than later .& 'Ephasis supplied)
Ae accord the sae treatent to petitioners in the instant case in their capacit+ as voters since the+ raise iportant issues involvin2 their ri2ht of suffra2e, considerin2 that the issue raised in this petition is li1el+ to arise a2ain.
Ahether a Special Election for a Sin2le, Three#ear Ter Senatorial Seat 0as 6alidl+ ;eld on "/ Ma+ &!!"
nder Section 7, 5rticle 6I of the Constitution, a special election a+ be called to fill an+
vacanc+ in the Senate and the ;ouse of Representatives (in the anner prescribed b+ la0,( thus= In case of vacanc+ in the Senate or in the ;ouse of Representatives, a special election a+ be called to fill such vacanc+ in the anner prescribed b+ la0, but the Senator or Meber of the ;ouse of Representatives thus elected shall serve onl+ for the une:pired ter. 'Ephasis supplied)
To ipleent this provision of the Constitution, Con2ress passed R.5. No. ** /$, 0hich provides in pertinent parts=
SECTION ". In case a vacanc+ arises in the Senate at least ei2hteen '"9) onths or in the ;ouse of Representatives at least one '") +ear before the ne:t re2ular election for Mebers of
Con2ress, the Coission on Elections, upon receipt of a resolution of the Senate or the ;ouse of Representatives, as the case a+ be, certif+in2 to the e:istence of such vacanc+ and callin2 for a special election, shall hold a special election to fill such vacanc+. If Con2ress is in recess, an official counication on the e:istence of the vacanc + and call for a special election b+ the President of the Senate or b+ the Spea1er of the ;ouse of Representatives, as the case a+ be, shall be sufficient for such purpose. The Senator or Meber of the ;ouse of Representatives thus elected shall serve onl+ for the une:pired ter.
SECTION &. The Coission on Elections shall fi: the date of the special election, 0hich shall not be earlier than fort+#five '/$) da+s nor later than ninet+ '7!) da+s fro the date of such resolution or counication, statin2 aon2 other thin2s the office or offices to be voted for= Provided, ho0ever, That if 0ithin the said period a 2eneral election is scheduled to be held, the special election shall be held siultaneousl+ 0ith such 2eneral election. 'Ephasis supplied) Section / of Republic 5ct No. @"** subse>uentl+ aended Section & of R.5. No. **/$, as follo0s=
Postponeent, 3ailure of Election and Special Elections. B : : : In case a peranent vacanc+ shall occur in the Senate or ;ouse of Representatives at least one '") +ear before the e:piration of the ter, the Coission shall call and hold a special election to fill the vacanc+ not earlier than si:t+ '*!) da+s nor lon2er than ninet+ '7!) da+s after the occurrence of the vacanc+.
;o0ever, in case of such vacanc+ in the Senate, the special election shall be held siultaneousl+ 0ith the ne:t succeedin2 re2ular election. 'Ephasis supplied)
Thus, in case a vacanc+ arises in Con2ress at least one +ear before the e:piration of the ter, Section & of R.5. No. **/$, as aended, re>uires COME-EC= '") to call a special election b+ fi:in2 the date of the special election, 0hich shall not be earlier than si:t+ '*!) da+s nor later than ninet+ '7!) after the occurrence of the vacanc+ but in case of a vacanc+ in the Senate, the special election shall be held siultaneousl+ 0ith the ne:t succeedin2 re2ular election? and '&) to 2ive notice to the voters of, aon2 other thin2s, the office or offices to be voted for.
Did COME-EC, in conductin2 the special senatorial election siultaneousl+ 0ith the "/ Ma+ &!!" re2ular elections, copl+ 0ith the re>uireents in Section & of R.5. No. **/$J
5 surve+ of COME-EC8s resolutions relatin2 to the conduct of the "/ Ma+ &!!" elections reveals that the+ contain nothin2 0hich 0ould aount to a copliance, either strict or
substantial, 0ith the re>uireents in Section & of R.5. No. **/$, as aended. Thus, no0here in its resolutions&/ or even in its press releases&$ did COME-EC state that it 0ould hold a special
election for a sin2le three#+ear ter Senate seat siultaneousl+ 0ith the re2ular elections on "/ Ma+ &!!". Nor did COME-EC 2ive foral notice that it 0ould proclai as 0inner the
senatorial candidate receivin2 the "th hi2hest nuber of votes in the special election.
The controvers+ thus turns on 0hether COME-EC8s failure, assuin2 it did fail, to copl+ 0ith the re>uireents in Section & of R.5. No. **/$, as aended, invalidated the conduct of the special senatorial election on "/ Ma+ &!!" and accordin2l+ rendered ;onasan8s proclaation as the 0inner in that special election void. More precisel+, the >uestion is 0hether the special
election is invalid for lac1 of a (call( for such election and for lac1 of notice as to the office to be filled and the anner b+ 0hich the 0inner in the special election is to be deterined. 3or reasons stated belo0, the Court ans0ers in the ne2ative.
COME-EC8s 3ailure to 4ive Notice
of the Tie of the Special Election Did Not Ne2ate the Callin2 of such Election
The callin2 of an election, that is, the 2ivin2 notice of the tie and place of its occurrence, 0hether ade b+ the le2islature directl+ or b+ the bod+ 0ith the dut+ to 2ive such call, is
indispensable to the election8s validit+.&* In a 2eneral election, 0here the la0 fi:es the date of the
election, the election is valid 0ithout an+ call b+ the bod+ char2ed to adinister the election.&@
In a special election to fill a vacanc+, the rule is that a statute that e:pressl+ provides that an election to fill a vacanc+ shall be held at the ne:t 2eneral elections fi:es the date at 0hich the special election is to be held and operates as the call for that election. Conse>uentl+, an election held at the tie thus prescribed is not invalidated b+ the fact that the bod+ char2ed b+ la0 0ith the dut+ of callin2 the election failed to do so.&9 This is because the ri2ht and dut+ to hold the
election eanate fro the statute and not fro an+ call for the election b+ soe authorit+&7 and
Conversel+, 0here the la0 does not fi: the tie and place for holdin2 a special election but epo0ers soe authorit+ to fi: the tie and place after the happenin2 of a condition precedent, the statutor+ provision on the 2ivin2 of notice is considered andator+, and failure to do so 0ill render the election a nullit+."
In the instant case, Section & of R.5. No. **/$ itself provides that in case of vacanc+ in the Senate, the special election to fill such vacanc+ shall be held siultaneousl+ 0ith the ne:t succeedin2 re2ular election. 5ccordin2l+, the special election to fill the vacanc+ in the Senate arisin2 fro Senator 4uin2ona8s appointent as 6ice#President in 3ebruar+ &!!" could not be held at an+ other tie but ust be held siultaneousl+ 0ith the ne:t succeedin2 re2ular elections on "/ Ma+ &!!". The la0 char2es the voters 0ith 1no0led2e of this statutor+ notice and
COME-EC8s failure to 2ive the additional notice did not ne2ate the callin2 of such special election, uch less invalidate it.
Our conclusion i2ht be different had the present case involved a special election to fill a vacanc+ in the ;ouse of Representatives. In such a case, the holdin2 of the special election is sub<ect to a condition precedent, that is, the vacanc+ should ta1e place at least one +ear before the e:piration of the ter. The tie of the election is left to the discretion of COME-EC sub<ect onl+ to the liitation that it holds the special election 0ithin the ran2e of tie provided in
Section & of R.5. No. **/$, as aended. This a1es andator+ the re>uireent in Section & of R.5. No. **/$, as aended, for COME-EC to (call : : : a special election : : : not earlier than *! da+s nor lon2er than 7! da+s after the occurrence of the vacanc+( and 2ive notice of the office to be filled. The COME-EC8s failure to so call and 2ive notice 0ill nullif+ an+ attept to hold a special election to fill the vacanc+. Indeed, it 0ill be 0ell#ni2h ipossible for the voters in the con2ressional district involved to 1no0 the tie and place of the special election and the office to be filled unless the COME-EC so notifies the.
No Proof that COME-EC8s
3ailure to 4ive Notice of the Office to be 3illed and the Manner of
Deterinin2 the Ainner in the Special Election Misled 6oters
The test in deterinin2 the validit+ of a special election in relation to the failure to 2ive notice of the special election is 0hether the 0ant of notice has resulted in isleadin2 a sufficient nuber of voters as 0ould chan2e the result of the special election. If the lac1 of official notice isled a substantial nuber of voters 0ho 0ron2l+ believed that there 0as no special election to fill a vacanc+, a choice b+ a sall percenta2e of voters 0ould be void.&
The re>uired notice to the voters in the "/ Ma+ &!!" special senatorial election covers t0o atters. 3irst, that COME-EC 0ill hold a special election to fill a vacant sin2le three#+ear ter Senate seat siultaneousl+ 0ith the re2ular elections scheduled on the sae date. Second, that
COME-EC 0ill proclai as 0inner the senatorial candidate receivin2 the "th hi2hest nuber of votes in the special election. Petitioners have neither claied nor proved that COME-EC8s failure to 2ive this re>uired notice isled a sufficient nuber of voters as 0ould chan2e the result of the special senatorial election or led the to believe that there 0as no such special election.
Instead, 0hat petitioners did is conclude that since COME-EC failed to 2ive such notice, no special election too1 place. This bare assertion carries no value. Section & of R.5. No. **/$, as aended, char2ed those 0ho voted in the elections of "/ Ma+ &!!" 0ith the 1no0led2e that the vacanc+ in the Senate arisin2 fro Senator 4uin2ona8s appointent as 6ice#President in
3ebruar+ &!!" 0as to be filled in the ne:t succeedin2 re2ular election of "/ Ma+ &!!". Siilarl+, the absence of foral notice fro COME-EC does not preclude the possibilit+ that the voters had actual notice of the special election, the office to be voted in that election, and the anner b+ 0hich COME-EC 0ould deterine the 0inner. Such actual notice could c oe fro an+
sources, such as edia reports of the enactent of R.5. No. **/$ and election propa2anda durin2 the capai2n.
More than "! illion voters cast their votes in favor of ;onasan, the part+ 0ho stands ost pre<udiced b+ the instant petition. Ae sipl+ cannot disenfranchise those 0ho voted for
;onasan, in the absence of proof that COME-EC8s oission pre<udiced voters in the e:ercise of their ri2ht of suffra2e so as to ne2ate the holdin2 of the special election. Indeed, this Court is loathe to annul elections and 0ill onl+ do so 0hen it is (ipossible to distin2uish 0hat votes are la0ful and 0hat are unla0ful, or to arrive at an+ certain result 0hatever, or that the 2reat bod+ of the voters have been prevented b+ violence, intiidation, and threats fro e:ercisin2 their
franchise.(/
Other0ise, the consistent rule has been to respect the electorate8s 0ill and let the results of the election stand, despite irre2ularities that a+ have attended the conduct of the elections.$ This is
but to ac1no0led2e the purpose and role of elections in a deocratic societ+ such as ours, 0hich is=
to 2ive the voters a direct participation in the affairs of their 2overnent, either in deterinin2 0ho shall be their public officials or in decidin2 soe >uestion of public interest? and for that purpose all of the le2al voters should be peritted, unhapered and unolested, to cast their ballot. Ahen that is done and no frauds have been coitted, the ballots should be counted and
the election should not be declared null. Innocent voters should not be deprived of their
participation in the affairs of their 2overnent for ere irre2ularities on the part of the election officers, for 0hich the+ are in no 0a+ responsible. 5 different rule 0ould a1e the anner and ethod of perforin2 a public dut+ of 2reater iportance than the dut+ itself.* 'Ephasis in the
ori2inal)
Separate Docuentation and Canvassin2
Neither is there basis in petitioners8 clai that the anner b+ 0hich COME-EC conducted the special senatorial election on "/ Ma+ &!!" is a nullit+ because COME-EC failed to docuent separatel+ the candidates and to canvass separatel+ the votes cast for the special election. No such re>uireents e:ist in our election la0s. Ahat is andator+ under Section & of R.5. No. **/$ is that COME-EC (fi: the date of the election,( if necessar+, and (state, aon2 others, the office or offices to be voted for.( Siilarl+, petitioners8 reliance on Section @ of .P. l2. 99" on the filin2 of certificates of candidac+, and on Section /'/) of R.5. No. **/* on the printin2 of election returns and tall+ sheets, to support their clai is isplaced. These provisions 2overn elections in 2eneral and in no 0a+ re>uire separate docuentation of candidates or separate canvass of votes in a <ointl+ held re2ular and special elections.
Si2nificantl+, the ethod adopted b+ COME-EC in conductin2 the special election on "/ Ma+ &!!" erel+ ipleented the procedure specified b+ the Senate in Resolution No. 9/. Initiall+, the ori2inal draft of Resolution No. 9/ as introduced b+ Senator 3rancisco Tatad '(Senator Tatad() ade no ention of the anner b+ 0hich the seat vacated b+ forer Senator 4uin2ona 0ould be filled. ;o0ever, upon the su22estion of Senator Raul Roco '(Senator Roco(), the Senate a2reed to aend Resolution No. 9/ b+ providin2, as it no0 appears, that (the senatorial candidate 2arnerin2 the thirteenth '"th) hi2hest nuber of votes shall serve onl+ for the
une:pired ter of forer Senator Teofisto T. 4uin2ona, %r.( Senator Roco introduced the
aendent to spare COME-EC and the candidates needless e:penditures and the voters further inconvenience, thus=
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. Mr. President, I ove that 0e no0 consider Proposed Senate Resolution No. 7/ Flater converted to Resolution No. 9/G.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. Is there an+ ob<ectionJ FSilenceG There bein2 none, the otion is approved.
Consideration of Proposed Senate Resolution No. 7/ is no0 in order. Aith the perission of the od+, the Secretar+ 0ill read onl+ the title and te:t of the resolution.
TF;EG SFECRET5RG. Proposed Senate Resolution No. 7/ entitled
RESO-TION CERTI3IN4 TO T;E EKISTENCE O3 5 65C5NC IN T;E SEN5TE 5ND C5--IN4 ON T;E COMMISSION ON E-ECTIONS 'COME-EC) TO 3I-- P SC; 65C5NC T;RO4; E-ECTION TO E ;E-D SIM-T5NEOS- AIT; T;E
RE4-5R E-ECTION ON M5 "/, &!!" 5ND T;E SEN5TOR T;S E-ECTED TO SER6E ON- 3OR T;E NEKPIRED TERM
A;ERE5S, the ;onorable Teofisto T. 4uin2ona, %r. 0as elected Senator of the Philippines in "779 for a ter 0hich 0ill e:pire on %une !, &!!/?
A;ERE5S, on 3ebruar+ *, &!!", ;er E:cellenc+ President 4loria Macapa2al 5rro+o noinated Senator 4uin2ona as 6ice#President of the Philippines?
A;ERE5S, the noination of Senator 4uin2ona has been confired b+ a a<orit+ vote of all the ebers of both ;ouse of Con2ress, votin2 separatel+?
A;ERE5S, Senator 4uin2ona 0ill ta1e his Oath of Office as 6ice#President of the Philippines on 3ebruar+ 7, &!!"?
A;ERE5S, Republic 5ct No. @"** provides that the election for t0elve '"&) Senators, all
elective Mebers of the ;ouse of Representatives, and all elective provincial cit+ and unicipal officials shall be held on the second Monda+ and ever+ three +ears thereafter? No0, therefore, be it
RESO-6ED b+ the Senate, as it is hereb+ resolved, to certif+, as it hereb+ certifies, the e:istence of a vacanc+ in the Senate and callin2 the Coission on Elections 'COME-EC) to fill up such vacanc+ throu2h election to be held siultaneousl+ 0ith the re2ular election on Ma+ "/, &!!" and the Senator thus elected to serve onl+ for the une:pired ter.
5dopted,
'S2d.) 3R5NCISCO S. T5T5D Senator
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. Mr. President, I ove for the adoption of this resolution. SFEN5TORG OFSMEL5G '%). Mr. President.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. Sen. %ohn ;. Osea is reco2nied.
SFEN5TORG OFSMEL5G '%). Than1 +ou, Mr. President. Aill the distin2uished Ma<orit+ -eader, Chairan of the Coittee on Rules, author of this resolution, +ield for a fe0 >uestionsJ
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. Aith trepidation, Mr. President. F-au2hterG SFEN5TORG OFSMEL5G '%). Ahat a 0a+ of flatter+. F-au2hterG
Mr. President, I thin1 I recall that soetie in "7$" or "7$, there 0as a special election for a vacant seat in the Senate. 5s a atter of fact, the one 0ho 0as elected in that special election 0as then Con2ressan, later Senator 3eliFsGberto 6erano.
In that election, Mr. President, the candidates contested the seat. In other 0ords, the ele ctorate had to cast a vote for a ninth senator B because at that tie there 0ere onl+ ei2ht B to elect a eber or rather, a candidate to that particular seat.
Then I reeber, Mr. President, that 0hen 0e ran after the EDS5 revolution, t0ice there 0ere &/ candidates and the first "& 0ere elected to a si:#+ear ter and the ne:t "& 0ere elected to a three#+ear ter.
M+ >uestion therefore is, ho0 is this 2oin2 to be done in this electionJ Is the candidate 0ith the "th lar2est nuber of votes 2oin2 to be the one to ta1e a three#+ear terJ Or is there 2oin2 to be an election for a position of senator for the une:pired ter of Sen. Teofisto 4uin2onaJ
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. Mr. President, in this resolution, 0e are leavin2 the echanics to the Coission on Elections. ut personall+, I 0ould li1e to su22est that probabl+, the candidate obtainin2 the "th lar2est nuber of votes be declared as elected to fill up the une:pired ter of Senator 4uin2ona.
SFEN5TORG OFSMEL5G '%). Is there a la0 that 0ould allo0 the Coelec to conduct such an electionJ Is it not the case that the vacanc+ is for a specific officeJ I a reall+ at a loss. I a risin2 here because I thin1 it is soethin2 that 0e should consider. I do not 1no0 if 0e can No, this is not a Concurrent Resolution.
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. Ma+ 0e solicit the le2al 0isdo of the Senate President.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. Ma+ I share this inforation that under Republic 5ct No. **/$, 0hat is needed is a resolution of this Chaber callin2 attention to the need for the holdin2 of a special election to fill up the vacanc+ created, in this particular case, b+ the appointent of our
collea2ue, Senator 4uin2ona, as 6ice President.
It can be ana2ed in the Coission on Elections so that a slot for the particular candidate to fill up 0ould be that reserved for Mr. 4uin2ona8s une:pired ter. In other 0ords, it can be arran2ed in such a anner.
: : : :
SFEN5TORG RFOCOG. Mr. President.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. Sen. Raul S. Roco is reco2nied.
SFEN5TORG RFOCOG. Ma+ 0e su22est, sub<ect to a one#inute caucus, 0ordin2s to the effect that in the siultaneous elections, the "th placer be therefore deeed to be the special election for this purpose. So 0e <ust noinate " and it is 2ood for our collea2ues. It is better for the candidates. It is also less e:pensive because the ballot 0ill be printed and there 0ill be less disfranchiseent.
SFEN5TORG RFOCOG. If 0e can <ust dee it therefore under this resolution to be such a special election, a+be, 0e satisf+ the re>uireent of the la0.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. es. In other 0ords, this shall be a 2uidance for the Coelec. SFEN5TORG RFOCOG. es.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. B to ipleent.
SFEN5TORG RFOCOG. es. The Coelec 0ill not have the fle:ibilit+. TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. That is ri2ht.
SFEN5TORG RFOCOG. Ae 0ill alread+ consider the "th placer of the forthcoin2 elections that 0ill be held siultaneousl+ as a special election under this la0 as 0e understand it.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. es. That 0ill be a 2ood coproise, Senator Roco.
SFEN5TORG RFOCOG. es. So if the sponsor can introduce that later, a+be it 0ill be better, Mr. President.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. Ahat does the sponsor sa+J
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. Mr. President, that is a ost satisfactor+ proposal because I do not believe that there 0ill be an+one runnin2 specificall+ B
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. Correct.
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. B to fill up this position for three +ears and capai2nin2 nation0ide. TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. 5ctuall+, I thin1 0hat is 2oin2 to happen is the "th candidate 0ill be runnin2 0ith specific 2roups.
SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. es. Ahoever 2ets No. ".
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. I thin1 0e can specificall+ define that as the intent of this resolution. SFEN5TORG TF5T5DG. Sub<ect to st+le, 0e accept that aendent and if there 0ill be no other aendent, I ove for the adoption of this resolution.
: : : :
If there are no other proposed aendents, I ove that 0e adopt this resolution.
TF;EG PFRESIDENTG. There is a otion to adopt this resolution. Is there an+ ob<ectionJ FSilenceG There bein2 none, the otion is approved.@
Evidentl+, COME-EC, in the e:ercise of its discretion to use eans and ethods to conduct the special election 0ithin the confines of R.5. No. **/$, erel+ chose to adopt the Senate8s
proposal, as ebodied in Resolution No. 9/. This Court has consistentl+ ac1no0led2ed and affired COME-EC8s 0ide latitude of discretion in adoptin2 eans to carr+ out its andate of ensurin2 free, orderl+, and honest elections sub<ect onl+ to the liitation that the eans so adopted are not ille2al or do not constitute 2rave abuse of discretion.9 COME-EC8s decision to
abandon the eans it eplo+ed in the " Noveber "7$" and 9 Noveber "7$$ special
elections and adopt the ethod ebodied in Resolution No. 9/ is but a le2itiate e:ercise of its discretion. Conversel+, this Court 0ill not interfere should COME-EC, in subse>uent special senatorial elections, choose to revert to the eans it follo0ed in the " Noveber "7$" and 9 Noveber "7$$ elections. That COME-EC adopts eans that are novel or even disa2reeable is
no reason to ad<ud2e it liable for 2rave abuse of discretion. 5s 0e have earlier noted= The Coission on Elections is a constitutional bod+. It is intended to pla+ a distinct and
iportant part in our schee of 2overnent.1âwphi1 In the dischar2e of its functions, it should
not be hapered 0ith restrictions that 0ould be full+ 0arranted in the case of a less responsible or2aniation. The Coission a+ err, so a+ this Court also. It should be allo0ed considerable latitude in devisin2 eans and ethods that 0ill insure the accoplishent of the 2reat
ob<ective for 0hich it 0as created free, orderl+ and honest elections. Ae a+ not a2ree full+ 0ith its choice of eans, but unless these are clearl+ ille2al or constitute 2ross abuse of
discretion, this court should not interfere.7
5 Aord to COME-EC
The callin2 of a special election, if necessar+, and the 2ivin2 of notice to the electorate of necessar+ inforation re2ardin2 a special election, are central to an infored e:ercise of the ri2ht of suffra2e. Ahile the circustances attendant to the present case have led us to conclude that COME-EC8s failure to so call and 2ive notice did not invalidate the special senatorial election held on "/ Ma+ &!!", COME-EC should not ta1e chances in future elections. Ae reind COME-EC to copl+ strictl+ 0ith all the re>uireents under applicable la0s relative to the conduct of re2ular elections in 2eneral and special elections in particular.
