Jalosjos, Jr. vs. COMELEC

Upon the proclamation and assumption of office of a winning candidate for the House of Representatives, the COMELEC is divested of jurisdiction over all questions relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of that member, and jurisdiction vests exclusively in the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET).

Romeo M. Jalosjos, Jr. was the elected Mayor of Tampilisan, Zamboanga del Norte. While serving in that capacity, he purchased, renovated, and occupied a residential house and lot in Barangay Veterans Village, Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay, a different province and legislative district. Dan Erasmo, Sr. was a political opponent who opposed Jalosjos's voter registration transfer to Ipil and later challenged his certificate of candidacy for the position of Representative of the Second District of Zamboanga Sibugay. The dispute implicated the constitutional demarcation between the COMELEC's power to decide questions affecting elections and the HRET's exclusive jurisdiction over contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of the House of Representatives, as governed by Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.

In May 2007 Romeo M. Jalosjos, Jr. ran for Mayor of Tampilisan, Zamboanga del Norte and won. While serving as Mayor, he purchased a residential house and lot in Barangay Veterans Village, Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay, a different province, and renovated and furnished the property. He began occupying the house in September 2008.

After eight months, on May 6, 2009, Jalosjos applied with the Election Registration Board (ERB) of Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay for the transfer of his voter registration record to Precinct 0051F of Barangay Veterans Village. Dan Erasmo, Sr. opposed the application, but after due proceedings the ERB approved the transfer and denied Erasmo's opposition on July 31, 2009. Undeterred, Erasmo filed a petition to exclude Jalosjos from the list of registered voters before the 1st Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Ipil-Tungawan-R.T. Lim (MCTC). On August 14, 2009, the MCTC rendered judgment excluding Jalosjos, finding that he had not abandoned his domicile in Tampilisan since he continued to serve as its Mayor. Jalosjos appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pagadian City, which affirmed the MCTC decision on September 11, 2009.

Jalosjos elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals (CA) through a petition for certiorari with an application for a writ of preliminary injunction. On November 26, 2009, the CA granted the application and enjoined the courts below from enforcing their decisions, with the result that his name was reinstated in the voters list of Barangay Veterans Village pending resolution of the petition. On November 28, 2009, Jalosjos filed his Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for the position of Representative of the Second District of Zamboanga Sibugay for the May 10, 2010 National Elections, indicating therein that he resided in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay.

Erasmo filed a petition to deny due course to or cancel Jalosjos's COC before the COMELEC, claiming material misrepresentations regarding Jalosjos's residence. The COMELEC Second Division issued a joint resolution on February 23, 2010 dismissing Erasmo's petition for insufficiency in form and substance. While Erasmo's motion for reconsideration was pending before the COMELEC En Banc, the May 10, 2010 elections took place, and Jalosjos won as Representative of the Second District of Zamboanga Sibugay. He was proclaimed winner on May 13, 2010. On June 2, 2010, the CA rendered judgment in the voter's exclusion case, holding that the lower courts erred in excluding Jalosjos from the voters list since he was qualified under the Constitution and Republic Act 8189 to vote in that place. Erasmo filed a petition for review of the CA decision before the Supreme Court in G.R. 193566.

On June 3, 2010, the COMELEC En Banc granted Erasmo's motion for reconsideration and declared Jalosjos ineligible to seek election as Representative, holding that by continuing to hold the position of Mayor of Tampilisan, he should be deemed not to have transferred his residence to Barangay Veterans Village in Ipil. Both Jalosjos and Erasmo filed separate petitions for certiorari before the Supreme Court. The Office of the Solicitor General, in its comment, sought the dismissal of Erasmo's petitions and the grant of Jalosjos's, asserting that jurisdiction over the qualifications of a proclaimed Representative lies exclusively with the HRET under Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.

• Residency Qualification (Jalosjos, G.R. 192474): Jalosjos challenged the COMELEC's finding that he did not meet the residency requirement for the position of Representative of the Second District of Zamboanga Sibugay, maintaining that he had validly transferred his residence to Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay.
• Due Process (Jalosjos, G.R. 192474): Jalosjos argued that the COMELEC denied him the right to due process, citing Roces vs. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.
• Failure to Annul Proclamation (Erasmo, G.R. 192704): Erasmo assailed the COMELEC En Banc's failure to annul Jalosjos's proclamation as elected Representative despite his declared ineligibility, contending that the COMELEC should have nullified the proclamation.
• Voter Registration Validity (Erasmo, G.R. 193566): Erasmo sought review of the CA decision holding that Jalosjos was qualified to vote in Barangay Veterans Village, Ipil, challenging the validity of his voter registration transfer.

• Exception to Proclamation Rule (COMELEC law department): The COMELEC law department insisted that the proclamation of Jalosjos was an exception to the rule that proclamation divests COMELEC of jurisdiction, arguing that since the COMELEC declared him ineligible, his proclamation was void following the ruling in Codilla, Sr. vs. De Venecia.
• Statutory Authority Under RA 6646 (Erasmo): Erasmo argued that the COMELEC retained jurisdiction to issue its June 3, 2010 order based on Section 6 of Republic Act 6646, which authorizes the continuation of disqualification proceedings after the election when no final judgment of disqualification has been rendered before election day.
• HRET Jurisdiction (OSG): The Office of the Solicitor General, appearing as counsel for the COMELEC, sought the dismissal of Erasmo's petitions and the grant of Jalosjos's, asserting that under Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution, jurisdiction over the qualifications of a proclaimed Representative lies solely with the HRET.

• Jurisdictional Demarcation: Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction at this time to pass upon the question of Jalosjos's residency qualification for running for the position of Representative of the Second District of Zamboanga Sibugay, considering that he has been proclaimed winner in the election and has assumed the discharge of that office.
• COMELEC's Post-Proclamation Authority: Whether the COMELEC En Banc retained jurisdiction to declare Jalosjos ineligible after his proclamation, or whether jurisdiction over his qualifications had transferred to the HRET.
• Applicability of Section 6, RA 6646: Whether Section 6 of Republic Act 6646 authorized the COMELEC to continue with the disqualification case and declare Jalosjos ineligible after the election and proclamation.

• Jurisdictional Demarcation: No. The Supreme Court cannot pass upon Jalosjos's residency qualification, jurisdiction over which vests exclusively in the HRET upon his proclamation and assumption of office as Representative, pursuant to Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.
• COMELEC's Post-Proclamation Authority: No. The COMELEC En Banc acted without jurisdiction when it declared Jalosjos ineligible on June 3, 2010, because he had already been proclaimed on May 13, 2010, and proclamation divests the COMELEC of jurisdiction over qualification disputes in favor of the HRET.
• Applicability of Section 6, RA 6646: No. Section 6 of RA 6646 did not authorize the COMELEC's post-proclamation ruling because no final judgment of disqualification existed before election day — the last standing official action was the Second Division's dismissal of the disqualification case — and the COMELEC En Banc did not issue any order suspending proclamation pending resolution.

• Jurisdictional Demarcation: While the Constitution vests in the COMELEC the power to decide all questions affecting elections under Article IX(B), Section 2(3), such power does not extend to contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution vests the resolution of these contests solely upon the appropriate Electoral Tribunal. The Court had previously settled in Planas vs. Commission on Elections that the proclamation of a congressional candidate following the election divests the COMELEC of jurisdiction over disputes relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the proclaimed Representative in favor of the HRET. Since Jalosjos had been proclaimed on May 13, 2010 and had assumed office, any issue regarding his qualification was solely for the HRET to consider and decide. The Court could not usurp the power vested by the Constitution exclusively on the HRET.

• COMELEC's Post-Proclamation Authority: The COMELEC En Banc issued its order dated June 3, 2010 after Jalosjos had already been proclaimed on May 13, 2010. The COMELEC law department's argument that the proclamation was an exception to the rule — relying on Codilla, Sr. vs. De Venecia — was unavailing. The exception articulated in Mutuc vs. Commission on Elections applies only where the proclamation itself is illegal, but here the proclamation was valid because no final judgment of disqualification existed before election day. The last standing official action was the COMELEC Second Division's resolution dated February 23, 2010, which allowed Jalosjos's name to remain on the list of candidates. The COMELEC En Banc did not issue any order suspending his proclamation pending final resolution. Accordingly, the COMELEC exceeded its jurisdiction in declaring Jalosjos ineligible after proclamation.

• Applicability of Section 6, RA 6646: Section 6 of RA 6646 provides that a candidate declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted for, and if no final judgment is rendered before the election and the candidate receives the winning number of votes, the Court or Commission may order the suspension of proclamation during the pendency of the case upon motion of the complainant. Here, on election day the COMELEC En Banc had not yet resolved Erasmo's appeal from the Second Division's dismissal, so no final judgment of disqualification existed. The last standing official action was the Second Division's ruling allowing Jalosjos's candidacy. The COMELEC En Banc did not issue any order suspending proclamation. With the fact of proclamation and assumption of office, the statutory conditions for continued COMELEC jurisdiction under Section 6 were not satisfied, and jurisdiction over qualification questions transferred to the HRET.

• Demarcation Between COMELEC and HRET Jurisdiction — The COMELEC's power to decide all questions affecting elections under Article IX(B), Section 2(3) of the 1987 Constitution does not extend to contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Under Section 17, Article VI, the resolution of such contests is vested solely in the appropriate Electoral Tribunal. The proclamation of a congressional candidate following the election divests the COMELEC of jurisdiction over disputes relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the proclaimed member in favor of the HRET. In this case, because Jalosjos was proclaimed on May 13, 2010, the COMELEC En Banc's June 3, 2010 order declaring him ineligible was issued without jurisdiction.

• Exception for Illegal Proclamation — The general rule that proclamation divests the COMELEC of jurisdiction admits of an exception where the proclamation itself is illegal, as articulated in Mutuc vs. Commission on Elections. However, this exception does not apply where no final judgment of disqualification existed before election day and the COMELEC did not suspend the candidate's proclamation. In this case, the last standing official action before election day was the COMELEC Second Division's dismissal of the disqualification case, and no suspension order was issued, rendering the proclamation valid and the exception inapplicable.

• "The proclamation of a congressional candidate following the election divests COMELEC of jurisdiction over disputes relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the proclaimed Representative in favor of the HRET." — This is the controlling rule that defines the jurisdictional boundary between the COMELEC and the HRET, and it constitutes the ratio decidendi of the case.

• "Here, however, the fact is that on election day of 2010 the COMELEC En Banc had as yet to resolve Erasmo's appeal from the Second Division's dismissal of the disqualification case against Jalosjos. Thus, there then existed no final judgment deleting Jalosjos' name from the list of candidates for the congressional seat he sought." — This passage explains why Section 6 of RA 6646 did not authorize continued COMELEC jurisdiction, distinguishing the case from the statutory scenario where a final judgment of disqualification pre-exists the election.

• "With the fact of his proclamation and assumption of office, any issue regarding his qualification for the same, like his alleged lack of the required residence, was solely for the HRET to consider and decide." — This statement confirms that all qualification questions, including residency, fall within the HRET's exclusive domain once proclamation and assumption of office have occurred.

• Planas vs. Commission on Elections, 519 Phil. 506 (2006) — Controlling precedent establishing that proclamation of a congressional candidate divests the COMELEC of jurisdiction over qualification disputes in favor of the HRET. The Court relied on this case as the primary authority for its ruling.
• Vinzons-Chato vs. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 172131, April 2, 2007, 520 SCRA 166 — Cited in support of the rule that COMELEC jurisdiction ends upon proclamation, reinforcing the jurisdictional demarcation.
• Perez vs. Commission on Elections, 375 Phil. 1106 (1999) — Cited as additional authority for the proposition that qualification disputes of proclaimed members fall under HRET jurisdiction.
• Codilla, Sr. vs. De Venecia, 442 Phil. 139 (2002) — Cited by the COMELEC law department to argue that a void proclamation is an exception to the general rule; the Court distinguished this case because the proclamation here was valid, no final judgment of disqualification having existed before election day.
• Mutuc vs. Commission on Elections, 130 Phil. 663 (1968) — Cited for the principle that the usual remedy after proclamation is an election protest, but that this assumes a valid proclamation; where the proclamation itself is illegal, assumption of office does not affect the basic issues. The Court found the exception inapplicable here because the proclamation was valid.
• Roces vs. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, 506 Phil. 654 (2005) — Cited by Jalosjos in support of his due process argument regarding the jurisdictional question.

• Section 17, Article VI, 1987 Constitution — Vests in the Senate Electoral Tribunal and the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal the sole jurisdiction to be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective members. The Court applied this provision to hold that upon Jalosjos's proclamation and assumption of office, jurisdiction over his qualification transferred exclusively to the HRET.
• Article IX(B), Section 2(3), 1987 Constitution — Grants the COMELEC the power to decide all questions affecting elections, including the right to vote. The Court recognized this power but held it does not extend to contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of the House of Representatives.
• Section 6, Republic Act 6646 — Provides the effects of a disqualification case, stating that a candidate declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted for, and that if no final judgment is rendered before the election, the Commission may order suspension of proclamation during the pendency of the case. The Court held this provision did not authorize the COMELEC's post-proclamation ruling because no final judgment of disqualification existed before election day and no suspension of proclamation was ordered.
• Republic Act 8189 (The Voters Registration Act of 1996) — Governs voter registration qualifications. The CA applied this law in holding that Jalosjos was qualified to vote in Barangay Veterans Village, Ipil.

Antonio T. Carpio (Senior Associate Justice), Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro, Arturo D. Brion, Diosdado M. Peralta, Lucas P. Bersamin, Mariano C. Del Castillo, Martin S. Villarama, Jr., Jose Portugal Perez (on official leave), Jose Catral Mendoza, Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno, Bienvenido L. Reyes, and Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe concurred. No separate concurring opinions were noted.