Photo from Pexels | Sora Shimazaki
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
The Supreme Court underscored that a writ of mandamus may not compel the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to exercise its discretion in a certain way, such as granting or denying a request to open and recount ballot boxes.
FACTS:
In 2023, Rio, Jr. and others filed petitions before the COMELEC En Banc, asking for the review of Smartmatic Philippines, Inc. (Smartmatic)’s qualifications in view of the irregularities in the transmission and reception of election results during the May 9, 2022 elections. They also requested Smartmatic’s disqualification from participating in the procurement for the 2025 Automated Election System if any unexplained irregularities are found.
On November 29, 2023, the COMELEC En Banc granted the petitions of Rio, Jr. and others, disqualifying Smartmatic from participating in the bidding process. In the same Resolution, it ruled that the COMELEC may, upon the instance of the petitioners, order the recounting of the ballots in areas in every region in the country.
The petitioners filed motions with the COMELEC to open and recount at least 30 sealed ballot boxes from Sto. Tomas, Batangas.
Since the COMELEC did not respond to these motions, the petitioners filed with the Supreme Court a petition for the issuance of the writ of mandamus to compel the COMELEC to carry out its ministerial duty of implementing the Resolution it issued on November 29, 2023.
ISSUE: Whether or not the COMELEC may be compelled by mandamus to exercise its discretion.
The Supreme Court’s Decision
Mandamus is an extraordinary writ that compels a person, tribunal, corporation, board, or officer to carry out a legally required action if it has failed or refused to do so. This action must be ministerial, meaning that its performance does not involve the exercise of discretion or judgment.
Further, mandamus can be granted only when the petitioner’s legal right to the performance of the act in question is clear and complete.
In dismissing the petition, the Supreme Court held that the issue did not involve a ministerial act by the COMELEC, as the requested recount of physical ballots requires the exercise of the COMELEC’s discretion and judgment. It also ruled that petitioners failed to establish any clear, complete, and specific legal right to a recount.
The Court found that the petitioners failed to identify any law requiring the recount of the physical ballots in the 2022 National and Local elections. Moreover, the COMELEC Resolution expressly states that the COMELEC “may, upon Petitioner’s instance, order the conduct of the recount of the ballots.”
Nevertheless, the Court found that the COMELEC was guilty of official inaction when it acted on the motions beyond the period prescribed by its own rules.
Source:
Eliseo Mijares Rio, Jr., et. al. vs. Commission on Elections En Banc
G.R. No. 273136 | August 20, 2024
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 0917-5772207/ 09778050020.
All rights reserved.
