G.R. No. 265847 , August 6, 2024
MA. ZARAH ROSE DE GUZMAN-LARA, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND MANUEL N. MAMBA, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Petitioner Ma. Zarah Rose De Guzman-Lara and private respondent Manuel N. Mamba were gubernatorial candidates in Cagayan in the 2022 elections. On May 10, 2022, at 6:21 p.m., De Guzman-Lara filed a petition for disqualification via email against Mamba under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code, alleging vote-buying and unlawful disbursement of public funds. Mamba was proclaimed the winner on May 11, 2022, at 1:39 a.m. The COMELEC Second Division granted the petition and disqualified Mamba on December 14, 2022. However, the COMELEC En Banc reversed this on March 6, 2023, dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction. It applied its rules on electronic filing, which deemed a petition filed after 5:00 p.m. as filed the next day at 8:00 a.m. Thus, the petition was considered filed on May 11, 2022, after Mamba’s proclamation, rendering it a post-proclamation remedy over which it lacked jurisdiction. De Guzman-Lara filed a Petition for Certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the COMELEC En Banc committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petition for disqualification based on a strict application of its procedural rules regarding electronic filing, and whether a petition for disqualification under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code can be filed after the exact moment of proclamation but on the same calendar day.

RULING

The Separate Opinion agrees that the COMELEC En Banc’s dismissal was tainted with grave abuse of discretion and the case should be remanded, but qualifies its concurrence with the majority.
1. The COMELEC should have liberally applied its rules. Several circumstances warranted suspension of the rules in the interest of justice: (a) the actual filing preceded the actual proclamation; (b) the tardiness was only one hour and 21 minutes; (c) the email filing allowed real-time access; (d) the COMELEC Second Division had already given due course and found the petition meritorious; and (e) election cases are imbued with public interest. The COMELEC Rules allow suspension to obtain speedy disposition, and strict application was not commensurate with the minimal delay.
2. The Separate Opinion disagrees with the majority’s view that a petition for disqualification may be filed any time within the 24-hour calendar day of proclamation. It argues that the “date of proclamation” should be understood as the exact moment of proclamation, not the entire calendar day. This distinction is anchored on the dichotomy between pre-proclamation (disqualification) and post-proclamation (quo warranto) remedies. Allowing filing after the exact moment of proclamation but on the same day ignores this distinction and related constitutional provisions, potentially leading to absurd scenarios and conflict of authority. The concurrence is thus limited to the finding that the COMELEC En Banc gravely abused its discretion in not applying its rules liberally.