G.R. No. L-36157 August 29, 1980
Hadji Sharif Radjid Abirin, petitioner, vs. Commission on Elections, The Municipal Board of Canvassers of Parang, Sulu and Pershing Tantalie, respondents.

FACTS

Private respondent Pershing Tantalie was proclaimed the elected Mayor of Parang, Sulu, following the 1971 local elections. Petitioner Hadji Sharif Radjid Abirin, the defeated candidate, filed an election protest with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) on December 8, 1971. He sought the annulment of election results from twelve precincts, alleging fraud, terrorism, and that election returns were prepared by board inspectors at gunpoint. Tantalie moved to dismiss the petition, arguing that Abirin never formally objected to the inclusion of the contested returns during the canvass before the Municipal Board of Canvassers. Abirin countered that his representatives had objected, but these objections were not recorded in the minutes.
The COMELEC initially denied the motion to dismiss, finding the grounds required evidentiary support. After a hearing, however, the COMELEC issued a resolution dismissing Abirin’s petition and confirming Tantalie’s proclamation. The COMELEC found that Abirin failed to establish that he had objected before the Board of Canvassers and, through counsel, had virtually admitted during the hearing that he did not actually question the returns at the canvassing stage. The COMELEC based its dismissal on the doctrine that parties cannot raise questions for the first time on appeal that were not originally set up before the Board of Canvassers.

ISSUE

Whether the petition for review should be granted on the merits regarding the COMELEC’s jurisdiction and the procedural issue of failure to object before the Board of Canvassers.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for being moot and academic. The legal logic is grounded in the principle that courts will not determine cases where no actual controversy exists or where the issues have ceased to be justiciable. The Court noted that the term of office for the position of Mayor of Parang, Sulu, disputed from the 1971 elections, had already expired by 1980. A new election for municipal officials had been held on January 30, 1980. Consequently, any ruling on the procedural question of whether objections were properly raised before the Board of Canvassers or on the scope of the COMELEC’s jurisdiction under the 1971 Election Code would serve no practical legal purpose. The expiration of the contested term rendered the case devoid of any legal standing. The Court, following precedents, held that it would not make pronouncements on moot issues, as doing so would be an inefficient use of judicial resources and would not provide any effective relief to the parties. Therefore, without reaching the substantive and procedural arguments, the petition was dismissed.