GR 180444; (April, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 180444 ; April 8, 2008
FEDERICO T. MONTEBON and ELEANOR M. ONDOY, petitioners, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTION and SESINANDO F. POTENCIOSO, JR., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioners Federico T. Montebon and Eleanor M. Ondoy, along with other candidates for municipal councilor of Tuburan, Cebu, filed a petition for disqualification against respondent Sesinando F. Potencioso, Jr. for the May 14, 2007 elections. They alleged that respondent had been elected and served three consecutive terms as municipal councilor (1998-2001, 2001-2004, and 2004-2007) and was thus barred from running for a fourth consecutive term. Respondent admitted his election for three terms but claimed his service of the second term (2001-2004) was interrupted on January 12, 2004, when he succeeded as Vice Mayor of Tuburan due to the retirement of Vice Mayor Petronilo L. Mendoza. He argued this interruption meant he was not disqualified from running for councilor in 2007. The COMELEC First Division denied the disqualification petition, ruling the assumption of the vice-mayor role was an involuntary interruption of his second term. The COMELEC En Banc affirmed this decision.
ISSUE
Whether the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that respondent’s assumption of the office of Vice Mayor in January 2004 constituted an interruption in the continuity of his service for his 2001-2004 term as municipal councilor, thereby not making his 2007 candidacy a prohibited fourth consecutive term.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the COMELEC resolutions. The Court held that respondent’s assumption of the vice-mayor office was not a voluntary renunciation of his position as councilor but an involuntary severance by operation of law. Under Section 44 of the Local Government Code, a permanent vacancy in the office of vice mayor is filled by the highest-ranking sanggunian member. Respondent, as the highest-ranking councilor, was mandated by law to succeed, making his succession compulsory and obligatory. Citing Lonzanida v. Commission on Elections, the Court reiterated that involuntary severance from office interrupts the continuity of service for a term, whereas voluntary renunciation does not. Since respondent’s second term was involuntarily interrupted, he had not “fully served” three consecutive terms. Therefore, his candidacy in the 2007 elections was only for what was effectively a second consecutive term as councilor, and he was not disqualified under the three-term limit rule.