Comelec ruling shakes Ajuy mayor’s fate
Orders Court to resume proceedings on election fraud claims
An election protest against an Iloilo town mayor scored twin victories before the First Division of the Commission on Elections (Comelec).
This, as three commissioners in a Joint Resolution denied the mayor’s Petition that questioned rulings and proceedings of a lower Court.
Docketed as SPR No. 44-2008 and SPR No. 120-2008, petitioner was Ajuy Mayor Juan Alvarez while respondents were Judge Rogelio Amador and Ramon Espinosa.
Judge Amador presides the election protest case filed by Espinosa before Branch 66 of the 6th Regional Trial Court (RTC) here. He was impleaded in the Comelec case as public respondent. Espinosa for his part stands as the private respondent and opponent of Alvarez in the last elections.
With 483 votes then sealing the 2007 victory of Alvarez, Espinosa filed his election protest on allegations of fraud, anomalies and irregularities. Election returns in 117 out of 120 single and clustered voting precincts of Ajuy were questioned.
Espinosa in his protest presented to Court 12 grounds among which was the “dagdag-bawas” scheme allegedly employed against his favor. He also presented similar other illegal and unlawful practices of the votes cast blamed on the mayor’s camp.
Mayor Alvarez for his part despite his proclamation as winning candidate still counter-protested election results in 25 other voting precincts.
Judge Amador eventually proceeded to hear the case with an initial Order to set hearing dates. Mayor Alvarez apparently felt aggrieved over said Orders assailing its validity thus elevating the case to the Comelec First Division.
The mayor won the early battle with a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) issued by the Commission. Judge Amador was then directed to “cease and desist” from conducting Court proceedings yet when the TRO period lapsed, Espinosa immediately introduced evidences.
Said evidences backed Espinosa’s claims of vote-buying, fraud, terrorism and violence that purportedly marred the conduct of the polls.
The mayor opposed presentation of Espinosa’s evidences which eventually led to the second round of complaint before the Comelec First Division again.
Mayor Alvarez further assailed Judge Amador’s actions stating that the Judge “acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack and/or excess of jurisdiction….”
In a promulgation dated May 26, 2009, Commissioner Armando Velasco with Commissioners Leonardo Leonida and Rene Sarmiento put an end to the mayor’s arguments.
“We deny the petition. We find the Petitioner’s first two arguments untenable… neither do we subscribe to Petitioner’s submission that the court a quo has now lost jurisdiction of the protest…,” excerpts of the Comelec ruling went.
As for the matter of evidences presented by Espinosa, the Commission ruled for its acceptance.
“Despite the voluminous record and the seeming complexity of the issues set forth by Petitioner in this petition, We find that We need only to answer a simple question: “whether We can, by means of a writ of certiorari or prohibition prevent Private Respondent from presenting, and the court from admitting, evidence alliunde the ballots concerning vote-buying, fraud, terrorism or violence.” We rule in the negative,” the Resolution stated.
As such, the Comelec First Division found the mayor’s petitions “to be without basis” thus the corresponding denial.
Citing further that SPR No. 44-2008 and SPR No. 120-2008 lacked merit, an Order was also issued directing Judge Amador to resume proceedings on Espinosa’s election protest.
The mayor was aided by counsels, lawyers Rodolfo Pollentes Jr., Mehelinda Penetrante and Jehiel Cusa of the Ilarde, Penetrante, Tungala and Associates.
Espinosa for his part was aided by counsels, lawyers Edison Belloga of the Jagnaan, Belloga, Agot and Associates, Evari Tupas of the Tupas, Tupas and Tupas Law Office.