GR 154796; (October, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. No. 154796 October 23, 2003
RAYMUNDO A. BAUTISTA, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, JOSEFINA P. JAREĂ‘O, HON. MAYOR RAYMUND M. APACIBLE, FRANCISCA C. RODRIGUEZ, AGRIPINA B. ANTIG, MARIA G. CANOVAS, and DIVINA ALCOREZA, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Raymundo A. Bautista filed his certificate of candidacy for Punong Barangay of Barangay Lumbangan, Nasugbu, Batangas for the July 15, 2002 barangay elections. The Election Officer refused to accept it because Bautista was not a registered voter of that barangay. Bautista secured a mandamus order from the Regional Trial Court compelling the Election Officer to include his name in the list of candidates. Consequently, Bautista ran, obtained the highest number of votes, and was proclaimed the winner. He subsequently took his oath of office.
Meanwhile, the COMELEC Law Department recommended the cancellation of his certificate of candidacy due to his non-registration as a voter in Lumbangan. The COMELEC en banc subsequently issued Resolution No. 5404, canceling his certificate of candidacy and ordering the deletion of his name from the official list of candidates. It also issued Resolution No. 5584, stating the policy that a proclaimed candidate found ineligible for non-registration must cease from assuming office, and the Board of Canvassers should be reconvened to proclaim the eligible candidate who obtained the highest number of votes.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in canceling Bautista’s certificate of candidacy and issuing the assailed resolutions despite his proclamation and assumption of office.
RULING
No, the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The petition is dismissed. The legal logic is anchored on the mandatory nature of the voter registration requirement for barangay officials. Section 39(a) of the Local Government Code explicitly requires that a candidate for barangay office must be a registered voter in the barangay. This is a substantive qualification, not a mere formal requirement. Bautista’s failure to meet this condition rendered his certificate of candidacy void from the beginning. The COMELEC correctly denied it due course.
The Supreme Court ruled that Bautista’s proclamation and assumption of office did not cure this fundamental ineligibility. A void certificate of candidacy produces no legal effect. Consequently, Bautista was never a valid candidate, and the votes cast for him were considered stray. The second-placer, Divina Alcoreza, could not be proclaimed the winner as she did not receive a plurality of the valid votes. The ruling emphasizes that the statutory requirement of being a registered voter is indispensable, and its absence constitutes a continuing disqualification that can be raised even after proclamation. The COMELEC acted within its jurisdiction in implementing the law and ensuring that only qualified individuals assume barangay office.