G.R. No. L-53793 and G.R. No. L-54277, June 29, 1981.
LEONOR A. GARCIA, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, et al., and HONORATO C. PEREZ, SR., respondents. HONORATO C. PEREZ, SR., petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and LEONOR A. GARCIA, respondents.

FACTS

These consolidated petitions arose from the January 30, 1980 local elections in Cabanatuan City. Petitioner Leonor A. Garcia and private respondent Honorato C. Perez, Sr. were candidates for mayor. On January 31, 1980, Perez filed a petition with the City Board of Canvassers alleging irregularities and praying for suspension of the canvass and a recount. The COMELEC, via a telegram, ordered the suspension of the canvass for mayor. Despite this order, the City Board of Canvassers proceeded and proclaimed Garcia as the elected mayor on February 2, 1980.
Subsequently, Perez filed a pre-proclamation case (No. 44) with the COMELEC seeking the exclusion of election returns from 40 voting centers. The COMELEC, in a resolution dated March 27, 1980, granted Perez’s petition and ordered the exclusion of the 40 returns, effectively nullifying Garcia’s proclamation. Garcia filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. Meanwhile, Garcia also filed an election protest (No. 80-92) ex abundante ad cautelam before the COMELEC, seeking a revision and recount of ballots from the same 40 centers.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in its March 27, 1980 resolution ordering the exclusion of the 40 election returns in the pre-proclamation case. A secondary issue in G.R. No. L-54277 is the propriety of the COMELEC’s reinstatement of Garcia’s election protest.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed both petitions. The Court held that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in issuing the assailed resolution in the pre-proclamation case. The COMELEC’s power to suspend or annul a proclamation is plenary and discretionary, especially when invoked before the proclamation is made, to prevent the canvass of returns that are not genuine or appear to be tampered. The Court found that the COMELEC’s order of suspension was issued prior to the proclamation, and the Board of Canvassers’ defiance of that order rendered the subsequent proclamation void. The legal logic rests on the principle that a proclamation made in defiance of a lawful order of suspension by the COMELEC is invalid ab initio. The COMELEC, acting within its constitutional mandate to enforce election laws, properly ordered the exclusion of the contested returns to ascertain the true results of the election.
Regarding the election protest, the Court ruled that its dismissal of the pre-proclamation petition is without prejudice to the continuation of Garcia’s pending electoral protest. The issues raised in the protest, involving the revision and recount of ballots, are properly ventilated in a regular election protest, not in a pre-proclamation controversy. The resolution of the pre-proclamation case does not foreclose the protest, as they involve different remedies and procedures.