Meaningless ruling

Coming back from a short vacation, I find that the talk of the town is still about how those in power would like to hold on to it for as long as they can even if their term limits fixed by the Constitution or law have already expired. Actually, evasion of this term limit is possible sometimes because of the protracted and serpentine electoral process. This is illustrated in this case of Pedro, a town mayor who already served for three consecutive terms and was able to run again for the same office and sat as Mayor for almost another term of three years.

Pedro was first elected Mayor of his municipality for the term commencing July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1998. He was reelected for a second term commencing July 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001. But Pablo his closest rival filed an election protest against him. Nevertheless Pedro continued serving as Mayor of the municipality until the second term expired because Pablo’s protest was not yet resolved by then. In fact come election of 2001, Pedro ran again and won supposedly for his third and last term as municipal Mayor commencing July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2004. Meantime on August 6, 2001, Pablo’s election protest was finally resolved declaring him as the winner and Pedro’s proclamation for the second term null and void.

In the May 2004 election, after already serving for three terms, Pedro ran again as candidate for Mayor for the term commencing July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2007. His opponent was Pablo again. Two lawyers in the town asked the Comelec to cancel Pedro’s certificate of candidacy on the ground that he was elected and had already served three previous consecutive terms (1995-98; 1998-2001; 2001-2004). They alleged that his candidacy violated Section 8, Article X of the Constitution and Section 43 (b) of the Local Government Code.

On May 6, 2004 the Comelec second division granted the petition of the two lawyers and already disqualified Pedro to run for Mayor. But considering that Pedro filed a motion for reconsideration of that ruling before the Comelec en banc he was still able to run and won as Mayor for the 2004 to 2007 term.

So after his proclamation, Pablo also filed a petition for quo warranto against him before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) on the same ground that he was already ineligible to run for another term having already served as mayor for three consecutive terms. On November 22, 2004, the RTC dismissed this petition on the ground that Pedro did not serve the three term limit since he was not the duly elected Mayor in the May 1998 elections but Pablo himself.

Meantime, on March 14, 2005, the Comelec en banc finally ruled on Pedro’s motion for reconsideration of the second division ruling declaring him ineligible to run. The Comelec ruled that since Pedro’s proclamation for the second term was void his continuous service for three consecutive terms has been severed.

On November 8, 2005, the Comelec likewise affirmed the RTC’s dismissal of Pablo’s petition for quo warranto. It held that Pedro cannot be deemed to have served as Mayor during 1998-2001 because his proclamation was declared void. He served only as caretaker, thus his service during that term should not be counted, the Comelec ruled. Was the Comelec correct?

No. Two conditions must concur before the three-term limit for elective government official can apply, to wit: (1) that the official concerned has been elected for three consecutive terms in the same local government post, and (2) that he has fully served three consecutive terms.

Pedro’s assumption of Office as Mayor from July 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001, constitutes service for one full term in the context of the consecutive three term limit rule. It should be counted as a full term in contemplation of the three term limit prescribed by the constitutional and statutory provisions barring local elective officials from being elected and serving for more than three consecutive terms for the same position. The ruling in the election protest that it was Pedro’s opponent Pablo who won in the 1998 mayoral race and therefore the legally elected Mayor is without practical and legal use and value, having been promulgated after the term of the contested office has expired (Rivera vs. Comelec and Morales, G.R. 167591; Dee vs. Comelec and Morales, G.R. 170577, May, 9, 2007).

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.

* * *

E-mail at: [email protected]