May
the COMELEC, on its own initiative, unilaterally cancel a Certificate of
Candidacy on the basis that the candidate is not of the minimum age required for
the position for which he is running?
This
was answered in the negative by the Supreme Court, En Banc, in LUNA vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 165983, April 24,2007. The material portion of the decision is quoted as follows:
The COMELEC acted
with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in
declaring that Hans Roger, being under age, could not be considered to have
filed a valid certificate of candidacy and, thus, could not be validly
substituted by Luna. The COMELEC may
not, by itself, without the proper proceedings, deny due course to or cancel a
certificate of candidacy filed in due form. In Sanchez v. Del Rosario, the
Court ruled that the question of eligibility or ineligibility of a candidate
for non-age is beyond the usual and proper cognizance of the COMELEC.
Section
7413 of the Election Code provides that the certificate of candidacy shall
state, among others, the date of birth of the person filing the certificate. Section 7814 of the Election Code provides
that in case a person filing a certificate of candidacy has committed false
material representation, a verified petition to deny due course to or cancel
the certificate of candidacy of said person may be filed at any time not later
than 25 days from the time of filing of the certificate of candidacy.
If Hans Roger made a
material misrepresentation as to his date of birth or age in his certificate of
candidacy, his eligibility may only be
impugned through a verified petition to deny due course to or cancel such
certificate of candidacy under Section 78 of the Election Code.
In this case, there
was no petition to deny due course to or cancel the certificate of candidacy of
Hans Roger. The COMELEC only declared that Hans Roger did not file a valid
certificate of candidacy and, thus, was not a valid candidate in the petition
to deny due course to or cancel Luna’s certificate of candidacy. In effect, the
COMELEC, without the proper proceedings, cancelled Hans Roger’s certificate of
candidacy and declared the substitution by Luna invalid.
It would have been
different if there was a petition to deny due course to or cancel Hans Roger’s
certificate of candidacy. For if the
COMELEC cancelled Hans Roger’s certificate of candidacy after the proper
proceedings, then he is no candidate at all and there can be no substitution of
a person whose certificate of candidacy has been cancelled and denied due
course. However, Hans Roger’s certificate of candidacy was never cancelled
or denied due course by the COMELEC.
Moreover, Hans Roger
already withdrew his certificate of candidacy before the COMELEC declared that
he was not a valid candidate. Therefore, unless Hans Roger’s certificate of
candidacy was denied due course or cancelled in accordance with Section 78 of
the Election Code, Hans Roger’s certificate of candidacy was valid and he may
be validly substituted by Luna.
No comments:
Post a Comment