GR 177927; (February, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 177927 ; February 15, 2008
FLORANTE S. QUIZON, petitioner, vs. HON. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS (SECOND DIVISION), MANILA, ATTY. ARNULFO H. PIOQUINTO (ELECTION OFFICER, ANTIPOLO CITY) and ROBERTO VILLANUEVA PUNO, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Florante S. Quizon and private respondent Roberto V. Puno were candidates for the congressional seat of Antipolo City’s First District in the May 14, 2007 elections. On April 17, 2007, Quizon filed a Petition for Disqualification and Cancellation of Puno’s Certificate of Candidacy (COC) before the COMELEC, docketed as SPA-07-290. He alleged Puno failed to meet the residency requirement and materially misrepresented his residence in his COC. Quizon supplemented his petition on April 24, 2007, arguing Puno’s COC was invalid for indicating he was running in the First District of the Province of Rizal, a different legislative district from Antipolo City.
Believing the COMELEC was unreasonably delaying resolution of his petitions, Quizon filed the instant Petition for Mandamus with this Court on June 5, 2007, seeking to compel the COMELEC Second Division to act. He argued the delay deprived him of his right to be proclaimed winner, contending that if Puno were disqualified, votes for Puno would be stray, making Quizon the victor. However, during the pendency of this mandamus petition, the COMELEC Second Division promulgated its Resolution on July 31, 2007, dismissing Quizon’s disqualification case and declaring Puno qualified.
ISSUE
Whether the Supreme Court should grant the Petition for Mandamus to compel the COMELEC to resolve the pending disqualification case against Roberto V. Puno.
RULING
The petition is dismissed for being moot and for failing to meet the requisites for mandamus. The principal issue was rendered moot and academic by the COMELEC Second Division’s July 31, 2007 Resolution, which resolved the very petition Quizon sought to compel the COMELEC to decide. A case becomes moot when a supervening event eliminates the justiciable controversy, making a judicial declaration of no practical value. While exceptions exist, such as grave constitutional violations or issues capable of repetition yet evading review, none are present here. The Court generally declines jurisdiction over moot cases.
Furthermore, the petition for mandamus is unmeritorious. Mandamus lies to compel the performance of a ministerial duty, not a discretionary one. The act of resolving a petition for disqualification and cancellation of a COC involves the COMELEC’s exercise of its quasi-judicial discretion. While mandamus may compel an agency to exercise its discretion, it cannot control how that discretion is exercised. Here, the COMELEC had already exercised its discretion by issuing the Resolution. Quizon also failed to establish a clear legal right to the writ. His claim of a right to proclamation presupposes a final disqualification of Puno, which the COMELEC did not grant. The proper remedy after the COMELEC’s resolution was a motion for reconsideration and, if denied, an appeal, not a mandamus petition to this Court bypassing the hierarchy of courts.