G.R. No. 89604 ; April 20, 1990
ROQUE FLORES, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and NOBELITO RAPISORA, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Roque Flores was proclaimed the punong barangay of Poblacion, Tayum, Abra, after receiving the highest number of votes for kagawad in the March 28, 1989 elections, pursuant to Section 5 of R.A. No. 6679 . Private respondent Nobelito Rapisora, who placed second with one vote less, filed an election protest. The Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) sustained Rapisora, deducting two votes as stray from Flores’s total, thereby installing Rapisora. Flores appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), which affirmed the MCTC decision, holding that four votes cast for “Flores” without a first name or initial were invalid and should not have been divided between Flores and another candidate, Anastacio Flores. This reduced Flores’s total by two votes, placing him second.
Flores then appealed to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). The COMELEC dismissed the appeal, ruling it had no power to review the RTC decision, citing Section 9 of R.A. No. 6679 , which states that RTC decisions on questions of fact in barangay election appeals are final and non-appealable. Flores filed this petition for certiorari, arguing COMELEC should have taken cognizance and applied the “equity of the incumbent” rule to credit all four questioned votes to him.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the COMELEC correctly dismissed Flores’s appeal, which hinges on the constitutionality of Section 9 of R.A. No. 6679 regarding the appellate jurisdiction over barangay election contests.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition. The Court declared Section 9 of R.A. No. 6679 unconstitutional insofar as it provides that barangay election contest decisions from municipal or metropolitan trial courts shall be appealed to the regional trial court. This provision contravenes Article IX-C, Section 2(2) of the 1987 Constitution , which grants the COMELEC exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction. Therefore, the MCTC decision should have been appealed directly to the COMELEC, not the RTC. The Court, citing the precedent in Luison v. Garcia, emphasized that constitutional provisions on COMELEC jurisdiction are paramount.
Despite the constitutional flaw in the law, the COMELEC’s dismissal of the appeal is sustained because the substantive outcome was correct. On the merits, the Court ruled that Flores was not entitled to the “equity of the incumbent” rule under Section 211(2) of the Omnibus Election Code, as he was no longer the incumbent punong barangay on election day due to the operation of Section 16(3) of COMELEC Resolution No. 2022-A. Consequently, the four votes for “Flores” were correctly considered stray. With Flores’s valid votes at 462 and Rapisora’s at 463, Rapisora is the duly elected punong barangay. The Court resolved the constitutional issue immediately to guide future elections, emphasizing that even barangay-level cases warrant the Court’s full attention when constitutional questions are at stake.