TAWANTAWAN M. CAUNTONGAN AL HAJ, et al., vs. COMELEC, et al.

G.R. No. 151046.February 5, 2002

FACTS: Petitioners assail the resolution of the Commission on Elections en banc

dismissing their petition to declare a failure of elections in the Municipality of Munai,
Province of Lanao del Norte.

In their petition, petitioners Tawantawan M. Caruntongan and Nasser Manalao,

candidates for Municipal Mayor and Vice Mayor, respectively, enumerated the following
as grounds for the declaration of failure of elections:

1. Massive vote buying;

2. Illegal assignment of Rakim Paute as Election Officer of Munai;

3. Appointment of disqualified BEIs;

4. Shoot-out on the eve of the election between unidentified armed men and
members of the Philippine Army escorting election forms and paraphernalia in barangay
Cadulawan;

5. Transfer of polling places without notice;

6. Absence of voting booths in barangays Tambo and Cadulawan; and

7. Non-signing of the Voter's Registration Form.

(p. 151, Rollo).

The COMELEC dismissed the petition because the grounds relied upon are not
those which constitute grounds for a declaration of failure of election.

ISSUE: Whether the petition constitute grounds for a declaration of failure of election.

HELD: Petitioners filed the instant petition which must necessarily fail. Section 6, Article
1 of the Omnibus Election Code explicitly states:

SEC. 6. Failure of Election. If, on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud,
or other analogous causes the election in any polling place has not been held on the
date fixed, or had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the
voting, or after the voting and during the preparation and the transmission of the
election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to
elect, and in any of such cases the failure or suspension of election would affect the
result of the election, the Commission shall, on the basis of a verified petition by any
interested party and after due notice and hearing, call for the holding or continuation of
the election not held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect on a date
reasonably close to the date of election not held, suspended or which resulted in a
failure to elect but not later than thirty days after the cessation of the cause of such
postponement or suspension of the election or failure to elect.

Clearly, the only three instances wherein a failure of election may be validly
declared are when: 1) the election in any polling place has not been held on the date
fixed in account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes;
2) the election in any polling place had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for
the closing of the voting on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or
other analogous causes; or 3) after the voting and during the preparation and
transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election
results in a failure to elect on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or
other analogous cases.This enumeration is exclusive and restrictive.It limits the power
of this Commission to annul the results of an election only to those instances where the
election is not held, is suspended or results in a failure to elect.The latter phrase should
be understood in its literal sense, which is, nobody was elected (Borja, Jr. vs.
COMELEC, 260 SCRA 604 [1996]).

Moreover, the irregularities pointed out by petitioners such as vote-buying, fraud,

and terrorism are grounds for an election contest and may not, as a rule, be invoked to
declare a failure of election and to disenfranchise the greater number of the electorate
through the misdeeds, precisely, of only a relative few (Ututalum vs. COMELEC, 181
SCRA 335 [1990];