G.R. No. 170908; August 24, 2007
NESTOR SAN JUAN, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS (FIRST DIVISION) and NAPOLEON SELPO, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Nestor San Juan and private respondent Napoleon Selpo were candidates for Punong Barangay of San Ramon, Tinambac, Camarines Sur in the July 15, 2002 elections. The Barangay Board of Canvassers initially proclaimed San Juan as the winner. Selpo filed an election protest before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC), impugning the canvass in three precincts and praying for a revision of ballots. San Juan, in his Answer, also prayed for a recount. The MTC ordered a revision and, after proceedings, rendered a Decision on December 4, 2002, proclaiming Selpo the duly elected Barangay Captain and declaring San Juan’s proclamation null and void.
San Juan appealed to the COMELEC First Division. In a Resolution dated October 25, 2004, the COMELEC First Division dismissed the appeal for lack of merit. San Juan’s lead counsel received a copy of this Resolution on November 3, 2004. San Juan subsequently filed a Motion for Reconsideration on November 16, 2004. In an Order dated December 5, 2005, the COMELEC First Division denied the motion for being filed out of time per Section 2, Rule 19 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, and for lacking a verified statement on the date of receipt.

ISSUE

Whether the COMELEC First Division committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in denying San Juan’s Motion for Reconsideration.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition, finding no grave abuse of discretion by the COMELEC First Division. The legal logic is anchored on procedural rules and jurisdictional finality. While election cases must be heard first in division and motions for reconsideration of division decisions should be decided by the Commission en banc (as per Rule 19, Sections 5 and 6 of the COMELEC Rules), this procedural requirement is contingent upon the timely filing of a proper motion. The Court emphasized that San Juan’s Motion for Reconsideration was indisputably filed out of time. Under Section 2, Rule 19 of the COMELEC Rules, such a motion must be filed within five (5) days from promulgation. The record shows receipt of the assailed Resolution on November 3, 2004, yet the motion was filed only on November 16, 2004, clearly beyond the reglementary period.
Consequently, the belated motion was a mere scrap of paper that did not toll any period nor confer any right for elevation to the COMELEC en banc. The COMELEC First Division’s dismissal of the motion was therefore valid and proper, not a grave abuse of discretion. The Court further noted that forwarding the matter to the COMELEC en banc would be futile, as the result would be the same given the procedural defect, citing the analogous ruling in Cayat v. COMELEC. The petition was denied for lack of merit.