G.R. No. 104848 January 29, 1993
ANTONIO GALLARDO, ANTONIO AREVALO, CRESENCIO ECHAVES, EMMANUEL ARANAS, PALERMO SIA, RONNIE RAMBUYON, PRIMO NAVARRO, and NOEL NAVARRO, petitioners, vs. HON. SINFOROSO V. TABAMO, JR., in his capacity as Presiding Judge of Branch 28 of the Regional Trial Court of Mambajao, Camiguin, and PEDRO P. ROMUALDO, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners are the incumbent Governor, provincial treasurer, provincial auditor, provincial engineer, provincial budget officer, and government project laborers of Camiguin. Private respondent Pedro P. Romualdo was the incumbent Congressman and a candidate for re-election. On April 10, 1992, Romualdo filed a taxpayer’s suit (Special Civil Action No. 465) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) against petitioners to prohibit and restrain them from pursuing certain public works projects, releasing public funds for them, and issuing treasury warrants. The petition alleged that the projects violated the 45-day ban on public works under the Omnibus Election Code, as they were initiated without detailed engineering plans before the ban took effect; violated specific paragraphs of Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code regarding the hiring of laborers; violated provisions of the Local Government Code on the use of the 20% development fund and budget approval requirements; and that some foreign-assisted projects lacked required permits. Crucially, it alleged the projects were pursued “maliciously and intentionally for the purpose of corrupting the voters and inducing them to support the candidacy of Respondent Gallardo.” On the same day, the RTC issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the petitioners. Petitioners filed the instant petition for certiorari and prohibition, arguing the RTC had no jurisdiction as the case involved alleged violations of the Omnibus Election Code, jurisdiction over which is exclusively vested in the Commission on Elections (COMELEC).

ISSUE

Whether or not the Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of Special Civil Action No. 465, which principally involves allegations of violations of the Omnibus Election Code.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulled the Temporary Restraining Order issued by the RTC, and permanently enjoined the RTC from further proceeding with Special Civil Action No. 465. The Court held that jurisdiction over the alleged election offenses is exclusively vested in the COMELEC. The allegations in the petition before the RTC, particularly the charge that the public works projects were undertaken to corrupt voters and induce them to support a candidate, constitute an election offense under Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code. The Court ruled that the authority to conduct a preliminary investigation of election offenses is exclusively vested in the COMELEC, and the power to prosecute them is likewise with the COMELEC, through its duly authorized legal officers. The RTC’s jurisdiction over election offenses is limited to the criminal action after the case is filed by the COMELEC. The Court further held that the private respondent’s remedy was to file a complaint for the election offense with the COMELEC, not a special civil action with the RTC. The fact that the petition was styled as a taxpayer’s suit and alleged violations of other laws did not divest the COMELEC of its exclusive jurisdiction over the election offense aspects, which were the principal grounds for the injunctive relief sought.