G.R. No. 112060 July 17, 1995
NORBI H. EDDING, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and PABLO BERNARDO, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Norbi H. Edding and respondent Pablo S. Bernardo were candidates for municipal mayor of Sibuco, Zamboanga del Norte, in the May 1992 elections. Bernardo was initially proclaimed the winner. Edding filed an election protest with the Regional Trial Court (RTC). After a recount, the RTC rendered a decision on July 2, 1993, declaring Edding the winner and annulling Bernardo’s election. On July 8, 1993, Bernardo filed a Notice of Appeal, while Edding filed a Motion for Immediate Execution of the RTC decision pending appeal. The RTC approved Bernardo’s Notice of Appeal on July 12, 1993, but on July 13, 1993, it granted Edding’s motion for execution pending appeal. Edding subsequently assumed office.
Bernardo filed a Petition for Certiorari with the COMELEC (SPR No. 5-93), seeking to annul the RTC’s order granting execution pending appeal. The COMELEC issued the assailed Order dated September 23, 1993, granting a writ of preliminary injunction to restrain the RTC’s order and Edding from performing mayoral duties. Edding filed the instant petition before the Supreme Court, arguing that the COMELEC has no jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari over interlocutory orders of the RTC.

ISSUE

Whether the Commission on Elections has jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus over interlocutory orders issued by Regional Trial Courts in election cases.

RULING

Yes, the COMELEC possesses the jurisdiction. The Supreme Court abandoned its previous rulings in Garcia v. De Jesus and Tobon-Uy v. COMELEC, which held that the COMELEC lacked such power absent an express constitutional or statutory grant. The Court, aligning with its recent decision in Relampagos v. Cumba, held that the COMELEC’s constitutional appellate jurisdiction over contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts necessarily includes the power to issue auxiliary writs like certiorari. This is essential to effectively exercise its appellate review and correct errors of jurisdiction committed by lower courts. The power to issue these writs is inherent in and incidental to its appellate jurisdiction, as recognized under Section 50 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 697 (The 1978 Election Code), a provision which remains operative as it is not inconsistent with the 1987 Constitution .
However, the Court found that the RTC acted within its jurisdiction in granting execution pending appeal. The filing of a notice of appeal does not automatically divest the trial court of jurisdiction to resolve a seasonably filed motion for execution pending appeal. Since Edding’s motion was filed within the reglementary period for appeal, the RTC retained jurisdiction to rule on it. Nevertheless, the petition was ultimately dismissed for being moot and academic, as the term of the contested mayoral office had already expired on June 30, 1995.