G.R. Nos. 94459-60; January 24, 1991
GUILLERMO R. SANCHEZ and CARLITO T. TAN, petitioners, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, et al., respondents.

FACTS

On February 5, 1990, private respondents filed notices of recall against petitioners, the incumbent Mayor and Vice-Mayor of Butuan City. The City Election Registrar approved a schedule for the signing of the recall petition under COMELEC Resolution No. 1612. Petitioners opposed subsequent amendments to this schedule. On March 2, 1990, the COMELEC suspended the proceedings via Minute Resolution No. 90-0254. Later, on May 23, 1990, the COMELEC promulgated a new set of rules, Resolution No. 2272. On June 27, 1990, the COMELEC issued Minute Resolution No. 90-0590, which declared the signing process under the old Resolution No. 1612 null and void, as superseded by Resolution No. 2272, and set new dates for the signing process.
Petitioners filed this petition for prohibition, arguing that COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion. They contended that Resolution No. 2272 was unconstitutional for lack of an enabling law and that Minute Resolution No. 90-0590 was invalid. The Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order against the new signing schedule.

ISSUE

The primary issues are: (1) Whether COMELEC Resolution No. 2272 is constitutional and valid; and (2) Whether COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing Minute Resolution No. 90-0590, which nullified the ongoing recall process under Resolution No. 1612 and reset it under Resolution No. 2272.

RULING

The petition is granted. On the first issue, the Court ruled that Resolution No. 2272 is valid and constitutional. Petitioners’ argument that it lacked a legislative basis is without merit. While the 1987 Constitution mandates Congress to enact a local government code with an effective recall mechanism, the existing Local Government Code (B.P. 337) remains operative until repealed. Section 59 of B.P. 337 expressly authorizes the COMELEC to promulgate rules and regulations to supervise recall elections. Therefore, Resolution No. 2272 was a valid exercise of this delegated authority.
On the second issue, the Court held that COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing Minute Resolution No. 90-0590. The fundamental rule is that laws and regulations have no retroactive effect unless expressly provided. Resolution No. 2272 took effect on June 2, 1990, but the recall notices were filed on February 5, 1990, and the process had already commenced under Resolution No. 1612. Applying the new resolution to nullify the ongoing process gave it an invalid retroactive effect. Furthermore, the COMELEC’s action created an illogical scenario where a single recall petition would be governed by two different sets of rules. Consequently, Minute Resolution No. 90-0590 was declared null and void. The COMELEC was ordered to continue the recall proceedings under the original schedule approved under Resolution No. 1612, counting from the date of its prior suspension.