GR 259850; (June, 2023) (Digest)
G.R. No. 259850, June 13, 2023
KILUSAN NG MAMAMAYAN PARA SA MATUWID NA BAYAN, ET AL., PETITIONERS, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS (COMELEC), RESPONDENT.
FACTS
Petitioners, a coalition and its individual members, filed a Petition for Mandamus to compel the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to issue implementing rules and regulations (IRRs) for various election laws and to conduct public consultations in formulating these rules. They specifically sought rules concerning: 1) mandatory minimum functional system capabilities under Section 7 of Republic Act (RA) No. 9369; 2) other legal safeguards; 3) the right to take photographs under Section 179 of the Omnibus Election Code and RA No. 7166; 4) implementation of the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail ruling; 5) resolution of discrepancies in COMELEC resolutions regarding camera bans; 6) electronic signatures under RA No. 9369; 7) authentication of electronic transmission of results; 8) direct electronic transmission to the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas; 9) a truly random manual audit; and 10) other justice-related concerns. Petitioners argued that the COMELEC’s refusal to act on their letter requesting these IRRs and consultations constituted grave abuse of discretion. They cited specific COMELEC resolutions (e.g., Resolution No. 8786, Section 40(f) and (g); Resolution No. 10088, Section 2(f); Resolution No. 10460, Section 20) which they claimed were promulgated without public consultation and contravened statutory provisions. Petitioners also prayed for a temporary restraining order to stop the COMELEC from using Smartmatic technology for the 2022 elections and beyond until the requisite IRRs were issued.
ISSUE
Whether the writ of mandamus should be issued to compel the COMELEC to promulgate implementing rules and regulations and conduct public consultations as prayed for by the petitioners.
RULING
No. The Petition was dismissed and the prayer for injunctive relief was denied. The Supreme Court held that mandamus does not lie to compel the COMELEC to exercise its rule-making power in a specific manner. The Court emphasized that the COMELEC, as an independent constitutional body, possesses discretionary authority in formulating rules and regulations for the conduct of elections. The issuance of IRRs is a quasi-legislative function that involves discretion, and mandamus can only compel the performance of a ministerial duty, not control discretion. The Court found that the COMELEC had not unlawfully neglected any duty, as it had been issuing various resolutions to implement election laws. Furthermore, the Court noted that the Petition suffered from procedural defects, including non-compliance with rules on proof of service and proper verification and certification against forum shopping.