GR 176724; (October, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 176724 October 6, 2008
MAYOR KENNEDY B. BASMALA, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and AMENODIN U. SUMAGAYAN, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Kennedy B. Basmala and private respondent Amenodin U. Sumagayan were candidates for mayor in Taraka, Lanao del Sur during the May 10, 2004 National and Local Elections. Sumagayan was proclaimed the winner with 2,103 votes against Basmala’s 1,866 votes. Basmala filed an election protest with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Marawi City, contesting the results in 21 out of 43 precincts. The RTC rendered a Decision declaring Basmala the duly elected mayor, having tallied results from 38 precincts after rejecting the election returns from five specific precincts (2-A, 19-A, 28-A, 30-A, and 39-A), resulting in 1,831 votes for Basmala and 1,662 for Sumagayan. Sumagayan appealed to the COMELEC. The COMELEC Second Division reversed the RTC, reinstating the results from all 43 precincts and declaring Sumagayan the winner. The COMELEC en banc sustained this ruling. Basmala then filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether the Commission on Elections committed grave abuse of discretion in reversing the RTC’s decision and declaring Amenodin U. Sumagayan as the duly elected mayor.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition. The Court held that the issue of who was the duly elected mayor had been rendered moot and academic by the expiration of the term of the contested office and the election of a new set of municipal officials in the May 14, 2007 elections. Furthermore, the Court found that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The COMELEC, as the specialized agency tasked with election supervision, examined the records, evidence, and election documents. Its findings of fact, supported by substantial evidence, are final and non-reviewable. The Court emphasized that it is not a trier of facts and will only intervene if grave abuse of discretion is shown, which was not present in this case. The COMELEC correctly ruled that the petitioner failed to present clear and convincing evidence to justify the invalidation of the election returns from the five contested precincts, relying only on the self-serving testimonies of his witnesses, while the BEI chairpersons testified to orderly and peaceful elections.