GR 249858 Lazaro Javier (Digest)
G.R. No. 249858 , February 19, 2025
Mark Paul Ildefonso, Accused-Appellant
FACTS
A 10-inch knife was confiscated from accused-appellant Mark Paul Ildefonso after he was frisked during a buy-bust operation conducted in Laoag City within the election period. He was charged with, among other things, violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 9561-A in relation to COMELEC Resolution No. 9735 and the Omnibus Election Code for carrying a deadly weapon. The majority acquitted him, applying the Court’s pronouncement in Buella v. People that the term “deadly weapon” under the relevant election laws does not include “bladed instruments.”
ISSUE
Whether the accused-appellant should be convicted for violating COMELEC Resolution No. 9561-A by carrying a bladed instrument (a 10-inch knife) outside his residence during the election period.
RULING
The dissenting opinion respectfully opines that the conviction for violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 9561-A must stand. The dissent argues that:
1. The constitutionality of the COMELEC Resolution was not raised by the parties and is not the lis mota of the case; thus, the Court should not pass upon it.
2. The precedent in Buella v. People is inapplicable as it specifically pertained to COMELEC Resolution No. 10015, not Resolution No. 9561-A invoked in this case.
3. Section 32 of Republic Act No. 7166 , which prohibits bearing “firearms or other deadly weapons” during the election period, includes bladed instruments. The phrase “even if licensed to possess or carry the same” is not an element of the offense but merely anticipates and precludes a potential defense, clarifying that only a COMELEC permit is a valid authorization.
4. Bladed instruments are considered deadly weapons under other existing laws (e.g., Act No. 1780 , Section 26, which remains unrepealed) and are treated as such when used as qualifying circumstances in crimes like rape.
5. COMELEC’s contemporaneous and long-standing interpretation that “deadly weapon” includes “bladed instruments” is entitled to great respect, given its constitutional mandate to ensure peaceful and orderly elections.
6. The accused-appellant was found in possession of a 10-inch knife outside his residence during the election period, and the lower courts’ factual finding rejecting his claim that it was a work tool is binding.
Therefore, the dissenting opinion votes to find accused-appellant Mark Paul Ildefonso GUILTY of the charged election offense.