proclamation is no proclamation at all and the proclaimed candidate's assumption of office cannot deprive the Comelec of the power to declare such nullity and annul the proclamation."

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; COMELEC RESOLUTION 8889 WAS MERELY AN ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUANCE, NOT A RESULT OF AN ADVERSARIAL PROCEEDING, HENCE, IS NOT BINDING ON PARTIES WHO HAD NO PARTICIPATION THEREIN.-More importantly, Resolution No. 8889 was merely an administrative issuance, based on documents forwarded to the Comelec. It was not a result of an adversarial proceeding, where the parties were heard and allowed to adduce evidence. In issuing Resolution No. 8889, the Comelec did not bother to notify the parties who would have been affected. It was, thus, not a decision in an actual case or controversy which ripened into finality. Unquestionably, parties who had no participation therein were not bound by the resolution. Federico cannot invoke res judicata, one of the requirements of which is identity of parties. Stated differently, as Maligaya was not a party in the said proceeding, Resolution No. 8889 was not binding on him.

4. ID.; ID.; NO VALID PROCLAMATION, ABSENT A VALID SUBSTITUTION; IN A CHOICE BETWEEN PROVISIONS ON MATERIAL QUALIFICATIONS OF ELECTED OFFICIALS, ON THE ONE HAND, AND THE WILLL OF THE ELECTORATE IN ANY GIVEN LOCALITY, ON THE OTHER, THE COURT BELIEVES THAT THE BALANCE MUST ALWAYS TILT IN FAVOR OR UPHOLDING AND ENFORCING THE LAW. Without question, the votes garnered by Edna could not be credited to Federico as he was never a legitimate candidate. As there was an invalid substitution, there could not be a valid proclamation. In effect, the second COCVP in his name had no legal basis. Granting that those who voted for Edna had in mind to vote for Federico, nonetheless, the fact that there was no compliance with the rules cannot be ignored. *. In a choice between provisions on material qualifications of elected officials, on the one hand, and the will of the electorate in any given locality, on the other, we believe and so hold that we cannot choose the electorate will. The balance must always tilt in favor of upholding and enforcing the law. To rule otherwise is to slowly gnaw at the rule of law. It was alleged that the MBOC of Sto. Tomas, Batangas, raised the

**

hands of Federico as the winner. As correctly pointed out by Maligaya, however, this was impossible because the CCS printed the name of Edna Sanchez as the winner on the first COCVP. Thereafter, the MBOC, came out with a second COCVP, this time, with the name of Federico on it with the same number of votes as that of Edna, and generated on the very same date and the very same time as the first COCVPa physical impossibility.

WHICH

5. ID.; ID.; A PARTY HAS 10 DAYS WITHIN TO QUESTION THE PROCEEDING IN THE MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS (MBOC); THE PETITION TO ANNUL THE PROCLAMATION OF PETITIONER WAS FILED ON TIME. -Maligaya became aware of the issuance of the second COCVP in favor of Federico only on May 27, 2010. From that day, he had ten (10) days to question the dubious proceeding in the MBOC under Section 6 of Resolution No. 8804. Considering that Maligaya filed his petition to annul Federico's May 10, 2010 proclamation on June 1, 2010, it was indeed filed on time. It has been argued that there is no evidence that Maligaya became aware of the issuance of the second COCVP in favor of Federico only on May 27, 2010. In this regard, the Court believes that the actions taken by Maligaya after the elections and the separate proclamations of Edna and Federico strongly indicate that he was telling the truth. Indeed, there is no rhyme or reason why he should file a petition questioning the proclamation of Edna if he had knowledge of the subsequent proclamation of Federico. The Court adopts with approbation his reasoning on the matter.

OF

6. ID.; ID.; THE ANNULMENT OF THE ACTIONS THE MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS AND THE PROCLAMATION OF THE PARTY IS WITHIN THE POWERS OF THE COMELEC UNDER THE LAW TO ADMINISTER AND ENFORCE ELECTION LAWS; ELABORATED.—[T]he Comelec did not abuse its discretion when it annulled the actions of the MBOC and the proclamation of Federico. Such exercise is within its powers under the law to administer and enforce election laws. ***. [T]he statutory power of supervision and control by the COMELEC over the boards of canvassers includes the power to revise or reverse the action of the boards, as well as to do what the boards should have done. Such power includes the authority to initiate motu propio such steps or actions as may be required pursuant to law, like reviewing the actions of the board; conducting an inquiry affecting the genuineness of election returns beyond the election records of the polling places involved; annulling canvass or proclamations based on incomplete returns or on incorrect or tampered returns; invalidating a canvass or proclamation made in an unauthorized meeting of the board of canvassers either because it lacked a quorum or because the board did not meet at all; requiring the board to convene.

7. ID.; ID.; ABSENT A VALID SUBSTITUTION, THE CANDIDATE WITH THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF VOTES SHOULD BE PROCLAIMED AS THE DULY ELECTED MAYOR; THE RULE ON SUCCESSION UNDER SECTION 44 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CANNOT BE INVOKED ABSENT VACANCY.-As Federico's substitution was not valid, there was only one qualified candidate in the mayoralty race in Sto. Tomas, Batangas Maligaya. Being the only candidate, he received the highest number of votes. Accordingly, he should be proclaimed as the duly elected mayor in the May 10, 2010 elections. Considering that Maligaya was the winner, the position of Intervenor Silva that he be considered the legal successor of Federico, whom he claims failed to qualify, has no legal basis. There is simply no vacancy. When there is no vacancy, the rule on succession under Section 44 of the LGC cannot be invoked.

of municipal mayor of Sto. Tomas, Batangas, in the May 10, 2010 Automated National and Local Elections. Maligaya was the Liberal Party's official mayoralty candidate.2

On April 27, 2010, Armando Sanchez, husband of Edna and the gubernatorial candidate for the province of Batangas, died. Two days later, or on April 29, 2010,3 Edna withdrew her Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for the position of mayor. She then filed a new COC and the corresponding Certificate of Nomination and Acceptance (CONA) for the position of governor as substitute candidate for her deceased husband.

On May 5, 2010, petitioner Renato M. Federico (Federico) filed with the Office of the Election Officer of Sto. Tomas, Batangas, his COC and CONA5 as official candidate of the Nationalista Party and as substitute candidate for mayor, in view of the withdrawal of Edna.

On May 7, 2010, the Comelec Law Department referred the Affidavit of Withdrawal, the COC and the CONA of Edna, as substitute candidate for her late husband, and those of Federico, as substitute candidate for her, to the Comelec En Banc for its consideration.6

On the same day, May 7, 2010, Maligaya filed his Petition to Deny Due Course and to Cancel Certificate of Candidacy of Federico before the Comelec, docketed as SPA No. 10-137 (DC). Maligaya sought to have Federico declared ineligible to run as substitute candidate for Edna because the period to file the COC for substitute candidates had already lapsed after December 14, 2009, pursuant to Section

13 of Comelec Resolution No. 8678.8

In Resolution No. 8889,9 dated May 8, 2010, the COMELEC En Banc gave due course to the COC of Edna as substitute gubernatorial candidate in the Batangas province and to that of Federico as substitute mayoralty candidate in Sto. Tomas.

By that time, however, the official ballots had already been printed. Expectedly, on May 2010, the day of elections, the name "SANCHEZ, Edna P." was retained in the list of candidates for Mayor of Sto. Tomas, and garnered the highest number of votes 28,389 against Maligaya's 22,577 votes. 10

On May 11, 2010, the Municipal Board of Canvassers (MBOC) printed the Certificate of Canvass of Votes and Proclamation of Winning Candidates11 (COCVP) showing "SANCHEZ Edna P." as the winning mayoralty candidate. The printed COCVP, reads:

We, THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBERS of the CITY/ MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS do hereby certify under oath that we have duly canvassed the votes cast in 81 precincts in the city/municipality for the Candidates therein for city/ municipality offices in the elections held on May 10, 2010. Attached hereto and forming part hereof is a Statement of Votes by Precinct (CEF No. 20-A-1) obtained by each candidate for the offices of Mayor and Vice-Mayor.

That after such canvass, it appears that SANCHEZ, Edna P. obtained 28389 votes for the office of City/Municipality Mayor, the same being the highest number of votes legally cast for said office; and SILVA, Armenius O. obtained 25532 votes for the office of City/ Municipality Vice Mayor, the same being the highest number of votes legally cast for said office.

ON THE BASIS OF THE FOREGOING, we hereby proclaim the above candidates as the duly elected City/ Municipality Mayor and City/ Municipality Vice Mayor.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have signed these presents in SANTO TOMAS, Province of Batangas this Tue May 11, 14:09:55 PHT 2010.

[Emphases and underscoring supplied]

Respondent Edna Sanchez, 12 docketed as SPC No. 10-022, on May 20, 2010. This petition was, however, later withdrawn as agreed upon by the parties, and the case was dismissed by the Comelec First Division. 1.13 13

A second print-out14 of the COCVP was issued by the MBOC bearing the same time and date with the same number of votes garnered by Edna being credited to Federico. The second print-out reads:

We, THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBERS of the CITY/ MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS do hereby certify under oath that we have duly canvassed the votes cast in 81 precincts in the city/municipality for the Candidates therein for city/municipality offices in the elections held on May 10, 2010. Attached hereto and forming part hereof is a Statement of Votes by Precinct (CEF No. 20-A-1) obtained by each candidate for the offices of Mayor and ViceMayor.

That after such canvass, it appears that FEDERICO, Renato M. obtained 28389 votes for the office of City/Municipality Mayor, the same being the highest number of votes legally cast for said office; and SILVA, Armenius O. obtained 25532 votes for the office, of City/Municipality Vice Mayor, the same being the highest number of votes legally cast for said office.

ON THE BASIS OF THE FOREGOING, we hereby proclaim the above candidates as the duly elected City/Municipality Mayor and City/Municipality Vice Mayor.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have signed these presents in SANTO TOMAS, Province of Batangas this Tue May 11, 14:09:55 PHT 2010.

[Emphases and underscoring supplied]

On June 1, 2010, upon learning of the proclamation of Federico as the winning mayoralty candidate by the MBOC, Maligaya filed his Petition to Annul Proclamation of Respondent Renato M. Federico 15 as mayor of Sto. Tomas, Batangas, docketed as SPC No. 10-082. The petition was predicated on the alleged illegal act of the MBOC in issuing a falsified and patently antedated second COCVP in the name of Federico without reconvening, without due notice, and without annulling the first COCVP issued in favor of Edna.

In his answer to the petition, Federico raised, among others, the defenses that the petition was an erroneous remedy, having no basis under the rules; that it was not based on valid grounds; and that it should not have been given due course as it was belatedly filed. 16

The members of the MBOC likewise filed an answer, claiming good faith when they proclaimed Federico as winner considering that the substitutions of Edna and Federico were valid under Comelec Resolution No. 8889.17

Meanwhile, Maligaya's petition to deny due course and to cancel the COC of

Federico was denied by the Comelec Second Division in its Resolution, 18 dated October 19, 2010. It gave due course to Federico's COC and CONA on the basis of the Comelec En Banc's Resolution No. 8889 which upheld Federico's substitution.

In its Resolution, 19 dated June 21, 2011, the Comelec First Division denied Maligaya's petition to annul the proclamation of Federico for having been filed out of time, as it was filed beyond the ten (10) day period from the day of proclamation as provided for under Section 6, Rule 4 of Comelec Resolution 8804.20 Further, it held that Federico's filing of candidacy for mayor, vice Edna, was valid.

Maligaya then filed his Verified Partial Motion for Reconsideration, 21 dated June 27, 2011, insisting that his petition had not yet prescribed and that Federico's substitution was null and void with his COC and CONA filed after December 14, 2009, the deadline provided for under Section 13 of Comelec Resolution No. 8678. He further claimed

that the generation of a second print-out of the COCVP bearing the same time and date with the same number of votes garnered by Edna being credited to Federico was questionable for it was impossible for Federico to be proclaimed as the winning candidate because the Canvassing and Consolidating System (CCS) had already printed a COCVP with the name of Edna, as the winner.

The said partial motion for reconsideration was elevated to the Comelec En Banc for proper disposition.

In his Comment22 on Maligaya's partial motion for reconsideration, Federico pointed out that his substitution of Edna had already been upheld with finality and, thus, could no longer be questioned. He prayed for the dismissal of the case.

In the hearing of August 25, 2011, the Comelec En Banc considered the case submitted for resolution.

On August 31, 2011, Federico filed a motion for reconsideration 23 of the Comelec En Banc's Order given in the August 25, 2011 hearing, claiming that the case was barred by forum shopping and litis pendentia. Pending his motion, he elevated the matter to the Supreme Court on September 9, 2011 by way of a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition, docketed as G.R. No. 198283. This petition was subsequently dismissed by the Court on October 4, 2011 for being premature in view of the pendency of the partial motion for reconsideration before the Comelec En Banc. 24

On December 21, 2011, the Comelec En Banc issued the assailed Resolution granting Maligaya's partial motion for reconsideration. Thus:

a Special Municipal Board of Canvassers for the municipality of Sto. Tomas, Batangas;

2. The Special Municipal Board of Canvassers is ordered to immediately notify the parties, reconvene and proclaim petitioner OSMUNDO M. MALIGAYA as the duly elected Mayor of Sto. Tomas, Batangas; and

3. The Law Department is directed to conduct an investigation on the members of the (Old) Municipal Board of Canvassers of Sto. Tomas, Batangas for possible violation of Section 32 pars. (c) and (f) Article VI of COMELEC Resolution No. 8809.

Let the Executive Director implement this resolution.

SO ORDERED.25

The Comelec En Banc ruled that the petition for the annulment of Federico's proclamation filed on June 1, 2011 was within the prescribed ten (10) day period. It explained that the period for the filing of the said petition should be reckoned from May 27, 2011, when Maligaya discovered the existence of the second COCVP and not on May 11, 2011, the proclamation date. The Comelec En Banc was of the view that the annulment of Federico's proclamation was in order because of his invalid substitution of Edna, as his substitute COC was filed beyond the deadline and due to the illegality of the proceedings of the MBOC in generating the second COCVP without authority from the Comelec and without notice to the parties, in violation of Comelec Resolution No. 8804.

Hence, Federico filed the present Petition for Certiorari with Prayer for Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining Order, dated December 23, 2011, before this Court anchored on the following

GROUNDS (1)

The validity of Petitioner's substitution as mayoralty candidate is already a settled fact.

Sanchez pursuant to Section 77 of the Omnibus Election Code.

B. The validity of Petitioner's substitution was already decided with finality by the Comelec.

C. Resolution No. 8889 is valid. The Comelec, in issuing Resolution No. 8889, passed upon all matters and issues laid before it in the case. Moreover, after Resolution No. 8889 was issued, it was in force and had to be complied with.

(II)

The proclamation of Petitioner was regular and done in accordance with law.

A. The votes cast for "SANCHEZ, Edna P." were legally considered votes for Petitioner.

B. The petition to annul Petitioner's proclamation was filed out of time.

(III)

Private Respondent cannot validly be proclaimed as elected mayor because he was the losing candidate.26

In the meantime, on December 29, 2011, the Comelec En Banc issued Minute Resolution No. 11-1306 constituting the special MBOC pursuant to its December 21, 2011 Resolution.27

On January 16, 2012, the Comelec En Banc issued a Writ of Execution ordering Federico to vacate the position as mayor and to cease and desist from performing the functions of the said office.28

On January 17, 2012, the Special MBOC issued a notice to convene on January 24, 2012 at the Comelec's Session Hall for the purpose of proclaiming Maligaya as the duly elected mayor.29