Codilla v De Venecia
) WON the COMELEC had jurisdiction to review the validity of
Topic: Election
Facts:
Codilla and Locsin were candidates for the position of
Representative of the 4th legislative district of Leyte during the
May 14, 2001 elections. At that time, Codilla was the Mayor of
Ormoc City while Locsin was the sitting Representative of the 4th
legislative district of Leyte.
A voter of Leyte then filed with the COMELEC a petition for
disqualification against Codilla for indirectly soliciting votes
from the registered voters of Kananga and Matag-ob, Leyte in
violation of Section 68 (a) of the Omnibus Code. It was alleged
that Codilla used the equipment and vehicles owned by the City
Government of Ormoc in order to extract, haul, and distribute
gravel and sand to the residents of Kananga and Matag-ob, Leyte
for the purpose of inducing, influencing, or corrupting them them
to vote for him.
At the time of the elections, the disqualification case was still
pending and Codillas name was included in the list of candidates
for district representative. The initial results showed that the
Codilla was the winning candidate.
His proclamation as the winner was suspended by the order of
the COMELEC. After the hearing of Codillas disqualification case,
he was found guilty and ordered disqualified. His votes were
considered stray, Locsin was proclaimed as the duly elected
representative and she subsequently took her oath of office.
Afterwards, Codilla filed a Motion for Reconsideration with the
COMELEC and sought for the annulment of Locsins
proclamation.
Issues:
(2.
the proclamation of a representative
(3.) WON the proclamation of the winner is a ministerial duty
Held:
(2.) The COMELEC en banc could still rule on the nullity of
Locsins proclamation because it was properly raised in the
Motion for Reconsideration. Section 3, Article IX-C of the 1987
Constitution empowers the COMELEC en banc to review, on
motion for reconsideration, decisions or resolutions decided by a
division.
Locsin contended that after having been proclaimed and taken
oath as representative of the 4th legislative district of Leyte, any
question relative to her election and eligibility should be brought
before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal pursuant
to section 17 Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.
The Court rejects her contention. It was the validity of the
Resolution of the COMELEC Second Division that was challenged
by Codilla and thus, the issue was still within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the COMELEC en banc to resolve. The HRET
cannot assume jurisdiction over the matter.
The instant case does not involve the election and qualification of
Locsin because it was not the eligibility of Locsin or her loyalty to
the Republic of the Philippines that is in question.
(3.) For a petition of mandamus to prosper, it must be shown
that the subject of the petition for mandamus is a ministerial act
or duty, and not purely discretionary on the part of the board,
officer, or person, and that the petitioner has a well-defined,
clear and certain right to warrant the grant.
A purely ministerial act or duty is one which an officer or
tribunal performs in a given state of facts in obedience to the
mandate of a legal authority without regard to or the exercise of
his own judgement upon the propriety or impropriety of the act
done.

If the law imposes a duty upon a public officer and gives him the
right to decide how or when the duty shall be performed, the
duty is discretionary. The duty is ministerial only when the
discharge of the same requires neither the exercise of official
discretion or judgement.

In the case at bar, the administration of oath and the registration

of Codilla in the Roll of Members of the House of Representatives
representing the 4th legislative district of Leyte is no longer a
matter of discretion on the part of the public respondents as the
facts are settled and beyond dispute.

Codilla has garnered 71, 350 votes against Locsins 53,447 in the
May 14, 2001 elections. The COMELEC Second Division had
initially ordered the proclamation of Locsin but on Motion for
Reconsideration, the COMELEC en banc set aside the order of its
Second Division and ordered Codillas proclamation. The
decision of the COMELEC en banc has not been challenged before
the Court by Locsin and has become final and executory.

The issue of who is the rightful Representative of the 4th

legislative district of Leyte has been settled by the COMELEC en
banc. The rule of law demands that its decision be obeyed by all
officials of the land and there is no alternative to the rule of law
except the reign of chaos and confusion.

The Petition for Mandamus is granted and the Public Speaker of

the House of Representatives shall administer the oath of Codilla
as the duly elected Representative of the 4th legislative district of
Leyte.