GR 264661 Lazaro Javier (Digest)
G.R. No. 264661, July 30, 2024
CLARYLYN A. LEGASPI, ET AL., PETITIONERS, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT.
FACTS
After the May 2022 National and Local Elections, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) received a document titled “APELA PARA SA MANO-MANONG PAGBILANG MULI NG MGA BOTO SA PROBINSYA NG PANGASINAN” (APELA) from Albert O. Quintinita, demanding a recount of votes due to alleged election anomalies. The COMELEC Law Department, via a letter, informed Quintinita of the proper procedure for filing an election contest. Petitioner Atty. Laudemer I. Fabia, as spokesperson, sought reconsideration, claiming the APELA was not an election protest but a “people’s initiative” in the exercise of sovereign rights and invoked the right to information. The COMELEC Law Department, in another letter, advised that it had no jurisdiction over the APELA. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed a Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus, claiming the COMELEC’s lack of action constituted grave abuse of discretion and violated their rights of suffrage, to information, and to petition the government.
ISSUE
Whether the Commission on Elections committed grave abuse of discretion in declining to act on the petitioners’ APELA, which they characterized as a people’s initiative.
RULING
No, the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The Petition was properly dismissed. Grave abuse of discretion implies a capricious, whimsical, or arbitrary exercise of judgment amounting to an evasion of a positive duty. Here, the COMELEC correctly refrained from taking cognizance of the APELA. The power of initiative refers to the people’s power to propose constitutional amendments or enact legislation through an election. The APELA was neither a petition to propose constitutional amendments nor a proposition to enact legislation; it was essentially a demand for a manual recount of votes. Even assuming it was a people’s initiative, the petitioners failed to follow the requisite procedure under COMELEC Resolution No. 10650, such as securing certifications on the number of registered voters, filing a proper petition under oath with the full text of the proposal, and paying the required fee. The COMELEC acted in accordance with the law and existing jurisprudence by declining to act on the improperly filed APELA. The dismissal of the Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus is proper.