BANAGA JR Vs COMELEC

BANAGA, JR. vs.
COMELEC
G.R. No. 134696
July 31, 2000
This special civil action for certiorari seeks to annul the en banc resolution of public respondent Commission
on Elections promulgated on June 29, 1998, in a COMELEC special action case, SPA No. 98-383.
Facts:
Petitioner Banaga, Jr. and respondent Bernabe, Jr. were both candidates for vice-mayor of the City of
Parañaque in the May 1998 election. In said election, the city board of canvassers proclaimed respondent
Bernabe, Jr., as the winner for having garnered 71,977 votes over petitioner Banaga, Jr.’s 68,970 votes.
Dissatisfied with the result, petitioner filed with the COMELEC on May 1998, a Petition to Declare Failure of
Elections and/or For Annulment of Elections, alleging that said election was replete with election offenses,
such as vote buying and flying voters. He also alleged that numerous Election Returns pertaining to the
position of Vice-Mayor in the City of Parañaque appear to be altered, falsified or fabricated.
In fact, there were people arrested who admitted the said election offenses. Therefore, the incidents were
sufficient to declare a failure of elections because it cannot be considered as the true will of the people.
Petitioner Banaga, Jr. is praying that he should be adjudged as the duly elected Vice-Mayor in the City of
Parañaque, during the May 1998 local elections.
Respondent COMELEC dismissed petitioner’s suit and held that the election offenses relied upon by
petitioner do not fall under any of the instances enumerated in Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code. The
election tribunal concluded that based on the allegations of the petition, it is clear that an election took
place and that it did not result in a failure to elect and therefore, cannot be viewed as an election protest.
Thus, this petition for certiorari alleging that the respondent COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction for dismissing his petition motu propio without any basis
whatsoever and without giving him the benefit of a hearing.
Issue:
WON petition to declare a failure of elections and/or for annulment of election is considered as an election
protest.
Decision:
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED. The assailed RESOLUTION of public respondent is AFFIRMED.
Costs against petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi:
1) No. petitioner’s action is a petition to declare a failure of elections or annul election

results. It is not an election protest.
First, his petition before the COMELEC instituted is simply captioned as "Petition to
Declare Failure of Elections and/or For Annulment of Elections" .
pursuant to Section 4 of Republic Act No. 7166 in relation to Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code.
Section 4 of RA 7166 refers to "postponement, failure of election and special elections" 7 while Section
6 of the Omnibus Election Code relates to" failure of election." It ch
Second, an election protest is an ordinary action while a petition to declare a failure of

elections is a special action under the 1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure as amended.
An election protest is governed by Rule 20 on ordinary actions, while a petition to
declare failure of elections is covered by Rule 26 under special actions.
In this case, petitioner filed his petition as a special action and paid the corresponding
fee therefor. Thus, the petition was docketed as SPA-98-383. This conforms to
petitioner’s categorization of his petition as one to declare a failure of elections or annul
election results. In contrast, an election protest is assigned a docket number starting
with "EPC", meaning election protest case.
Third, petitioner did not comply with the requirements for filing an election protest. He
failed to pay the required filing fee and cash deposits for an election protest. Failure to
pay filing fees will not vest the election tribunal jurisdiction over the case. Such
procedural lapse on the part of a petitioner would clearly warrant the outright dismissal
of his action. chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary
anrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary
There are three instances where a failure of election may be declared, namely,
(a) the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed on account of
force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous causes;
(b) the election in any polling place has been suspended before the hour fixed by law
for the closing of the voting on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or
other analogous causes; or
(c) after the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the election returns
or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect on
account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous causes. In these
instances, there is a resulting failure to elect. This is obvious in the first two scenarios,
where the election was not held and where the election was suspended. As to the third
scenario, where the preparation and the transmission of the election returns give rise to
the consequence of failure to elect must as aforesaid, is interpreted to mean that
nobody emerged as a winner. 10
Before the COMELEC can act on a verified petition seeking to declare a failure of
election two conditions must concur, namely (1) no voting took place in the precinct or
precincts on the date fixed by law, or even if there was voting, the election resulted in a
failure to elect; and (2) the votes not cast would have affected the result of the
election. 11 Note that the cause of such failure of election could only be any of the
following: force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous causes.

BANAGA JR Vs COMELEC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BANAGA JR Vs COMELEC

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BANAGA JR Vs COMELEC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BANAGA, JR. vs.

1) No. petitioner’s action is a petition to declare a failure of elections or annul election

Second, an election protest is an ordinary action while a petition to declare a failure of

anrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

You might also like