Moreno v. COMELEC | G.R. No.

168550 | August 10, 2006 | En Banc

Petitioner: Urbano Moreno

Respondents: COMELEC and Norma L. Mejes

SUMMARY: Respondent Mejes filed a petition to disqualify petitioner Moreno from running for Punong Barangay because
he had been convicted by final judgment of Arbitrary Detention. Moreno argues that since he was already granted
probation, he is now qualified to run for public office again. The SC ruled in his favor and reversed the COMELEC en banc.

FACTS:

 Private respondent Mejes filed a petition to disqualify petitioner Moreno from running for Punong Barangay of
Brgy. Cabugao, Daram, Samar in the July 15, 2002 Barangay and SK Elections on the ground that Moreno was
convicted by final judgment of the crime of Arbitrary Detention and sentenced to 4 months and 1 day to 2 years
and 4 months of imprisonment by RTC Catbalogan in 1998.
o Moreno filed an answer averring that the petition states no cause of action because he was already
granted probation. Allegedly, following the case of Baclayon v. Mutia, the imposition of the sentence of
imprisonment, as well as the accessory penalties, was thereby suspended.
o Moreno also argued that under Sec. 16 of the Probation Law of 1976, the final discharge of the
probation shall operate to restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended as a result of his conviction
and to fully discharge his liability for any fine imposed.
 The COMELEC en banc granted her petition and disqualified Moreno.
o However, the COMELEC en banc assails Sec. 40(a) of the LGC which provides that those sentenced by
final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by 1 year or more
of imprisonment, within 2 years after serving sentence, are disqualified from running for any elective
local position.
o Since Moreno was released from probation on December 20, 2000, disqualification shall commence on
this date and end 2 years thence.
o The grant of probation to Moreno merely suspended the execution of his sentence but did not affect his
disqualification from running for an elective local office.
 In this petition, Moreno argues that the disqualification under the LGC applies only to those who have served their
sentence and not to probationers because the latter do not serve the adjudged sentence.
o The Probation Law should allegedly be read as an exception to the LGC because it is a special law which
applies only to probationers.
o Further, even assuming that he is disqualified, his subsequent election as Punong Barangay allegedly
constitutes an implied pardon of his previous misconduct.

ISSUES + RULING:

1. W/N petitioner Moreno’s probation grants him the right to run for public office. YES.

 Sec. 16 of the Probation Law provides that "[t]he final discharge of the probationer shall operate to restore
to him all civil rights lost or suspended as a result of his conviction and to fully discharge his liability for any
fine imposed as to the offense for which probation was granted."
o Thus, when Moreno was finally discharged upon the court's finding that he has fulfilled the terms and
conditions of his probation, his case was deemed terminated and all civil rights lost or suspended as
a result of his conviction were restored to him, including the right to run for public office.
 The disqualification under Sec. 40(a), LGC covers offenses punishable by 1 year or more of imprisonment, a
penalty which also covers probationable offenses. In spite of this, the provision does not specifically
disqualify probationers from running for a local elective office.
 The Probation Law should be construed as an exception to the LGC.
o While the LGC is a later law which sets forth the qualifications and disqualifications of local elective
officials, the Probation Law is a special legislation which applies only to probationers.
 o It is a canon of statutory construction that a later statute, general in its terms and not expressly
repealing a prior special statute, will ordinarily not affect the special provisions of such earlier
statute.
 The SC also agrees with Moreno’s argument that since he won the 2002 elections, such operated as a fresh
mandate from the people of Brgy. Cabugao.
o It cites Justice Panganiban’s ponencia in Frivaldo v. COMELEC, where he said that “it would be far
better to err in favor of popular sovereignty than to be right in complex but little understood
legalisms.”

Disposition: Petition granted.