G.R. No. 129938 December 12, 1997
ALFREDO B. ENOJAS, JR., petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and JOSE R. RODRIGUEZ, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Alfredo B. Enojas, Jr. and respondent Jose R. Rodriguez were mayoralty candidates in Roxas, Palawan in the May 1995 elections. Rodriguez was proclaimed winner by 48 votes. Enojas filed an election protest (Special Election Case No. 891) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Palawan, seeking ballot revision in 102 precincts. After revising ballots in 39 precincts, Enojas withdrew the remaining precincts. After Enojas filed his Formal Offer of Exhibits and rested his case, Rodriguez filed a Motion to Dismiss alleging multiple grounds, including lack of jurisdiction due to non-payment of correct docket fees and lack of cause of action. The RTC initially granted the motion on the ground of lack of jurisdiction and dismissed the case. Enojas filed a petition with the COMELEC (SPR No. 1-96), which reversed the RTC’s order and remanded the case for further proceedings. When the RTC set the case for reception of Rodriguez’s evidence, Enojas opposed, arguing Rodriguez waived his right to present evidence by filing the motion to dismiss. The RTC agreed and issued an Order declaring Rodriguez to have waived his right to present evidence and considered the case submitted for decision. The RTC then rendered a decision declaring Enojas the winner. Rodriguez filed a petition for certiorari with the COMELEC (SPR No. 9-97) questioning the RTC’s orders. The COMELEC issued a temporary restraining order. After the TRO expired, the RTC issued a writ of execution pending appeal, and Enojas assumed office as mayor. Rodriguez filed another COMELEC petition (SPR No. 18-97). The COMELEC consolidated the petitions and issued a resolution granting them, setting aside the RTC’s orders and decision, ordering the RTC to proceed with trial, and directing Enojas to vacate the position and Rodriguez to assume it to restore status quo ante.

ISSUE

Whether the motion to dismiss filed by respondent Rodriguez after petitioner Enojas had rested his case should be considered as a demurrer to evidence, thereby waiving his right to present evidence.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court ruled that the motion to dismiss filed by Rodriguez was in the nature of a demurrer to evidence. The Court cited the established doctrine in election protest cases, beginning with Demetrio vs. Lopez, that a motion for dismissal filed by the protestee after the protestant has rested his case must be considered as a demurrer to the evidence, with an implied waiver by the protestee to present his evidence. This is due to the summary and peremptory nature of election protests, where periods are short and fatal, and trials are rapid and preferential, to avoid frustrating the law and defeating the will of the electorate. The Court found that the motion filed by Rodriguez, which included the ground of lack of cause of action based on the evidence offered, was substantively a demurrer questioning the sufficiency of the protestant’s evidence. The stage of the proceeding at which it was filed and its primary objective determined its nature. Consequently, Rodriguez waived his right to present evidence. The COMELEC resolution was reversed and set aside. The decision of the RTC declaring Enojas the duly elected mayor was reinstated, and the RTC was ordered to cease further proceedings. The decision was immediately executory.