G.R. No. 86564 August 1, 1989
RAMON L. LABO, JR., petitioner, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS (COMELEC) EN BANC AND LUIS L. LARDIZABAL, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Ramon L. Labo, Jr., proclaimed Mayor-elect of Baguio City on January 20, 1988, sought to restrain the COMELEC from inquiring into his citizenship qualification. Private respondent Luis L. Lardizabal filed a “Petition for Quo Warranto with Prayer for Immediate Annulment of Proclamation and Restraining Order or Injunction” on January 26, 1988. The COMELEC initially treated this as a pre-proclamation controversy (SPC Case No. 88-288), for which no docket fee was collected. On February 8, 1988, the COMELEC re-docketed it as a pure quo warranto petition (EPC Case No. 88-19), and Lardizabal paid the P300 filing fee on February 10, 1988. Labo argued the petition was filed out of time because, per Section 253 of the Omnibus Election Code, a quo warranto petition must be filed within ten days after proclamation. He contended that without payment of the filing fee—an indispensable requirement under COMELEC rules—the petition was ineffectual and thus deemed filed only on February 10, which was 21 days after his proclamation.

ISSUE

Whether the COMELEC acquired jurisdiction over the quo warranto petition, considering the timing of the payment of the filing fee.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the COMELEC validly acquired jurisdiction. The petition was filed on time. First, during the period from January 26 to February 8, 1988, the COMELEC treated the petition as a pre-proclamation controversy, which suspended the reglementary period for filing a quo warranto petition under Section 248 of the Omnibus Election Code. Consequently, when the fee was paid on February 10, it was still within the legally extended period. Second, the Court examined the applicable filing fee requirements. COMELEC Resolution No. 1996, which imposed the P300 fee, took effect only on March 3, 1988, seven days after its publication as required by Republic Act No. 6646. It could not retroactively apply to a petition filed in January 1988. The earlier Resolution No. 1450 lacked proof of publication, which is essential for effectivity under the due process clause as established in Tañada v. Tuvera. Thus, at the time Lardizabal filed his petition, there was no effectively published rule mandating immediate payment of a filing fee for quo warranto proceedings. The delay, if any, was not attributable to Lardizabal’s fault but to the COMELEC’s procedural handling. Therefore, the COMELEC correctly assumed jurisdiction to inquire into Labo’s citizenship.