GR 172563; (April, 2007) (Digest)
G.R. No. 172563; April 27, 2007
MIKE A. FERMIN, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and ALIMUDIN A. MACACUA, Respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Mike Fermin and private respondent Alimudin Macacua were candidates for Mayor of Kabuntalan, Maguindanao in the May 2004 elections. Fermin was initially proclaimed, but the COMELEC annulled this due to the non-functioning of clustered Precinct No. 25A/26A, which had 264 registered voters. A special election was held in July 2004, resulting in Macacua’s proclamation. Fermin challenged this, leading the COMELEC to nullify that special election and schedule another for May 6, 2006.
After the second special election, the canvass showed both candidates tied at 2,208 votes each. The Special Municipal Board of Canvassers (SMBOC) scheduled a special public hearing for May 14, 2006, to resolve the tie by drawing lots per the Omnibus Election Code. However, on May 9, 2006, Macacua filed an Extremely Urgent Omnibus Motion alleging irregularities, including that voting was prematurely stopped. The COMELEC en banc issued an Order on May 9, requiring comments, holding the May 14 hearing in abeyance, and setting the motion for hearing on May 18.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC en banc committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in issuing the Orders dated May 9, 2006 and May 16, 2006.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The COMELEC’s broad constitutional mandate to enforce election laws and ensure free, orderly, honest, and credible elections grants it considerable latitude in adopting means to achieve these objectives. Its Rules of Procedure are to be liberally construed and may be suspended in the interest of justice and speedy disposition.
The May 9 Order was a valid exercise of the COMELEC’s supervisory control over boards of canvassers under Section 227 of the Omnibus Election Code. It acted on a motion alleging serious irregularities that could affect the election’s integrity. The subsequent May 16 Order, which annulled the SMBOC’s May 14 hearing and Fermin’s proclamation conducted despite the hold order, was a proper corrective measure to maintain orderly proceedings. The COMELEC’s actions were not capricious, whimsical, or despotic but were aimed at investigating claims that threatened the purity of the electoral process. No grave abuse of discretion was found, as its actions fell well within its constitutional and statutory powers to secure a fair canvass. The petition was dismissed.