GR 179285; (February, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 179285 ; February 11, 2008
IMELDA Q. DIMAPORO, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and VICENTE BELMONTE, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Imelda Dimaporo and private respondent Vicente Belmonte were candidates for Representative of the 1st District of Lanao del Norte in the May 14, 2007 elections. The Provincial Board of Canvassers (PBOC) completed a partial canvass on May 22, 2007, showing Belmonte leading. However, the canvass was suspended after ballot boxes containing the Certificates of Canvass (COCs) from three municipalities were discovered forcibly opened and tampered with on May 19, 2007. The COMELEC, through subsequent resolutions, constituted a Special Provincial Board of Canvassers (SPBOC) to retrieve and canvass the COCs from the tampered boxes.
The SPBOC canvassed the contested COCs and, on June 29, 2007, proclaimed Belmonte as the winning candidate. Dimaporo filed a petition with the COMELEC to annul this proclamation, arguing the SPBOC acted without jurisdiction as its composition was invalid and that it used tampered election returns. The COMELEC En Banc dismissed her petition, prompting Dimaporo to file the instant petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing Dimaporo’s petition and in upholding the validity of Belmonte’s proclamation by the SPBOC.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition. The legal logic centers on the doctrine of jurisdiction by proclamation. The Court held that once a winning candidate for the House of Representatives has been proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed office, the COMELEC’s jurisdiction over pre-proclamation controversies concerning that office ceases. Jurisdiction over any subsequent election contest is vested exclusively in the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) by constitutional mandate.
The Court found that Belmonte was validly proclaimed by the SPBOC, a body duly constituted by the COMELEC pursuant to its constitutional powers to ensure the integrity of the canvass. At the time of proclamation, no court order had restrained it. Consequently, with Belmonte’s proclamation, oath, and assumption of office, the HRET acquired sole jurisdiction over any question relating to his election, returns, and qualifications. The COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion; it correctly recognized the shift in jurisdiction. Dimaporo’s proper recourse, if she wished to challenge Belmonte’s victory, was to file an election protest with the HRET, not a petition for certiorari against the COMELEC’s dismissal of a pre-proclamation case.