ABUNDO VS COMELEC and VEGA a rest period and involuntary interruption
Summary of prevailing jurisprudence of the term. on issues affecting consecutiveness of terms and involuntary interruption HELD:
FACTS: EFFECTIVE INTERRUPTION OF THE
CONTINUITY OF SERVICE ABUNDO was declared ineligible under the three-term limit rule, TO As is clearly provided in Sec. 8, Art. X RUN in the 2010 elections for MAYOR of the Constitution as well as in Sec. in Catanduanes. 43(b) of the LGC, voluntary renunciation of the office by the He was a Mayor for Four successive incumbent elective local official for elections: any length of time shall NOT, in determining service for three 2001 consecutive terms, be considered an 2004 interruption in the continuity of 2007 service for the full term for which the 2010 elective official concerned was elected. In Aldovino, Jr., however, During the 2001 and 2007 runs, he the Court stated the observation that emerged and was proclaimed as the law "does not textually state that mayor voluntary renunciation is the only actual interruption of service that In 2004, Jose torres was initially does not affect ‘continuity of service proclaimed as winner, and perform for a full term’ for purposes of the the functions of mayor in due time. three-term limit rule."32 Abundo protested and was eventually declared as winner of To constitute a disqualification to run for an elective local office pursuant 2004 Mayoralty – his assumption of to the aforequoted constitutional office stars MAY 9, 2006 until end of and statutory provisions, the following the 2004-2007 term of June 30, 2007 (1 requisites must concur: year and 1 month) (1) that the official concerned ISSUE: has been elected for three consecutive terms in the same Whether or not Abundo is deemed to local government post; and have served three consecutive terms and the period during which he was not (2) that he has fully served serving as mayor should be considered as three consecutive terms. CASE NO. 5
The principle behind the three-term due to any of the
limit rule: following contingencies, i.e., when the supposed covers only consecutive terms and incumbent refuses to that what the Constitution prohibits is assume office, fails to a consecutive fourth term qualify, dies, is removed from office, voluntarily An interruption usually occurs when resigns or is otherwise the official does not seek a fourth permanently term, immediately following the third. incapacitated to Of course, the basic law is discharge the functions unequivocal that a "voluntary of his office renunciation of the office for any length of time shall NOT be "it is not enough that an considered an interruption in the individual has served continuity of service for the full term three consecutive terms for which the elective official in an elective local concerned was elected." This office, he must also have qualification was made as a been elected to the deterrent against an elective local same position for the official intending to skirt the three- same number of times term limit rule by merely resigning before the before his or her third term ends. This disqualification can is a voluntary interruption as apply." There was, the 38
distinguished from involuntary Court ruled, no violation
interruption which may be brought of the three-term limit, for about by certain events or causes. Capco "was not elected to the office of the Involuntary interruption is claimed to mayor in the first term but result from any of these events or simply found himself causes: thrust into it by operation a) succession or assumption of of law"39 when a office by operation of law permanent vacancy occurred in that office. This contemplates a situation wherein an b) Preventive suspension elective local official fills (Aldovino Jr) by succession a higher local government post the period during which permanently left vacant a local elected official is CASE NO. 5
under preventive post in the May 1995
suspension cannot be elections since his considered as an assumption of office as interruption of the mayor cannot be continuity of his service deemed to have been by reason of a valid because the suspended election but by reason of official continues to stay a void proclamation in office although he is barred from exercising having been ordered to the functions and vacate his post before prerogatives of the the expiration of the office within the term, a situation which suspension period. The amounts to an best indicator of the involuntary suspended official’s relinquishment of office continuity in office is the absence of a e) proclamation of a non- permanent candidate as the winner in a replacement and the recall election lack of the authority to appoint one since no From June 30, 2001 until vacancy exists the recall election on September 24, 2002, the c) declaration of the defeated mayor of Puerto Princesa candidate as the winner in an was Socrates. During the election contest, same period, Hagedorn was simply a private d) declaration of the proclaimed citizen. This period is candidate as the losing party in clearly an interruption in an election contest (failure of the continuity of election) Hagedorn’s service as mayor, not because of hindi xa considered ful term his voluntary kase pinaalis xa in view of the renunciation, but order to vacate because of a legal prohibition.41 Lonzanida cannot be considered as having f) removal of the official by been duly elected to the operation of law, CASE NO. 5
1. When a permanent vacancy
g) and other analogous causes. occurs in an elective position and the official merely h) Conversion of a Municipality assumed the position pursuant into a City to the rules on succession does not constitute an under the LGC, then his service for the unexpired portion of the interruption of the term of the replaced official incumbent official’s cannot be treated as one full continuity of service. term as contemplated under Latasa never ceased the subject constitutional and from acting as chief statutory provision that service executive of the local cannot be counted in the government unit. He application of any term limit never ceased from (Borja, Jr.). If the official runs discharging his duties again for the same position he and responsibilities as held prior to his assumption of chief executive of Digos. the higher office, then his succession to said position is by operation of law and is Naserve ung FULL TERM (ONG) considered an involuntary his proclamation was severance or interruption under protest did not (Montebon). make him less than a duly elected mayor. His 2. An elective official, who has proclamation as the duly served for three consecutive elected mayor in the terms and who did not seek the 1998 mayoralty election elective position for what could coupled by his be his fourth term, but later assumption of office and won in a recall election, had his continuous exercise an interruption in the continuity of the functions thereof of the official’s service. For, he had become in the interim, i.e., from start to finish of the from the end of the 3rd term up term, should legally be to the recall election, a private taken as service for a full citizen (Adormeo and term in contemplation of Socrates). the three-term rule. 3. The abolition of an elective local office due to the To summarize, hereunder are the conversion of a municipality to prevailing jurisprudence on issues a city does not, by itself, work affecting consecutiveness of terms to interrupt the incumbent and/or involuntary interruption, viz: CASE NO. 5
official’s continuity of service the term from start to finish. His
(Latasa). full service, despite the defeat, should be counted in the 4. Preventive suspension is not application of term limits a term-interrupting event as because the nullification of his the elective officer’s continued proclamation came after the stay and entitlement to the expiration of the term (Ong office remain unaffected and Rivera). during the period of suspension, although he is We rule that the above barred from exercising the pronouncement on preventive functions of his office during this suspension does not apply to the period (Aldovino, Jr.). instant case. Verily, it is erroneous to say that Abundo merely was 5. When a candidate is temporarily unable or disqualified to proclaimed as winner for an exercise the functions of an elective elective position and assumes post. For one, during the intervening office, his term is interrupted period of almost two years, reckoned when he loses in an election from the start of the 2004-2007 term, protest and is ousted from Abundo cannot be said to have office, thus disenabling him retained title to the mayoralty office from serving what would as he was at that time not the duly otherwise be the unexpired proclaimed winner who would have portion of his term of office had the legal right to assume and serve the protest been dismissed such elective office. For another, not (Lonzanida and Dizon). The having been declared winner yet, break or interruption need not Abundo cannot be said to have lost be for a full term of three years title to the office since one cannot or for the major part of the 3- plausibly lose a title which, in the first year term; an interruption for place, he did not have. Thus, for all any length of time, provided intents and purposes, even if the the cause is involuntary, is belated declaration in the election sufficient to break the protest accords him title to the continuity of service (Socrates, elective office from the start of the citing Lonzanida). term, Abundo was not entitled to the elective office until the election 6. When an official is defeated protest was finally resolved in his in an election protest and said favor.1âwphi1 decision becomes final after said official had served the full Consequently, there was a hiatus of term for said office, then his loss almost two years, consisting of a in the election contest does break and effective interruption of his not constitute an interruption service, until he assumed the office since he has managed to serve and served barely over a year of the CASE NO. 5
remaining term. At this juncture, We power or authority over the good
observe the apparent similarities of people of Viga, Catanduanes. Mayor Abundo’s case with the cases of Mayor Talaga in Adormeo and Consequently, the period during Mayor Hagedorn in Socrates as which Abundo was not serving as Mayors Talaga and Hagedorn were mayor should be considered as a rest not proclaimed winners since they period or break in his service were non-candidates in the because, as earlier stated, prior to the regularelections. They were judgment in the election protest, it proclaimed winners during the recall was Abundo’s opponent, Torres, who elections and clearly were not able was exercising such powers by virtue to fully serve the terms of the of the still then valid proclamation. deposed incumbent officials. Similar to their cases where the Court As a final note, We reiterate that deemed their terms as involuntarily Abundo’s case differs from other interrupted, Abundo also became or cases involving the effects of an was a private citizen during the election protest because while period over which his opponent was Abundo was, in the final reckoning, serving as mayor. If in Lonzanida, the the winning candidate, he was the Court ruled that there was one deprived of his right and interruption in Lonzanida’s service opportunity to serve his constituents. because of his subsequent defeat in To a certain extent, Abundo was a the election protest, then with more victim of an imperfect election reason, Abundo’s term for 2004-2007 system. While admittedly the Court should be declared interrupted since does not possess the mandate to he was not proclaimed winner after remedy such imperfections, the the 2004 elections and was able to Constitution has clothed it with assume the office and serve only for enough authority to establish a a little more than a year after winning fortress against the injustices it may the protest. bring.
As aptly stated in Latasa, to be In this regard, We find that a contrary
considered as interruption of service, ruling would work damage and the "law contemplates a rest period cause grave injustice to Abundo––an during which the local elective elected official who was belatedly official steps down from office and declared as the winner and assumed ceases to exercise power or authority office for only a short period of the over the inhabitants of the territorial term. If in the cases of Lonzanida and jurisdiction of a particular local Dizon, this Court ruled in favor of a government unit."75 Applying the said losing candidate––or the person who principle in the present case, there is was adjudged not legally entitled to no question that during the hold the contested public office but pendency of the election protest, held it anyway––We find more reason Abundo ceased from exercising to rule in favor of a winning CASE NO. 5
candidate-protestant who, by which he was duly elected in the May
popular vote, deserves title to the 2010 elections and is accordingly public office but whose opportunity ordered IMMEDIATELY REINSTATED to to hold the same was halted by an said position. Withal, Emeterio M. Tarin invalid proclamation. and Cesar O. Cervantes are ordered to immediately vacate the positions Also, more than the injustice that may of Mayor and Vice-Mayor of Viga, be committed against Abundo is the Catanduanes, respectively, and shall injustice that may likewise be revert to their original positions of committed against the people of Vice-Mayor and First Councilor, Viga, Catanduanes by depriving respectively, upon receipt of this them of their right to choose their Decision. leaders. Like the framers of the Constitution, We bear in mind that The TRO issued by the Court on July 3, We "cannot arrogate unto ourselves 2012 is hereby LIFTED. the right to decide what the people want"76 and hence, should, as much This Decision is immediately as possible, "allow the people to executory. exercise their own sense of proportion and rely on their own strength to SO ORDERED. curtail the power when it overreaches itself." For democracy 77
draws strength from the choice the
people make which is the same choice We are likewise bound to protect.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is
PARTLY GRANTED. Accordingly, the assailed February 8, 2012 Resolution of the Commission on Elections Second Division and May 10, 2012 Resolution of the Commission on Elections en banc in EAC (AE) No. A- 25-2010 and the Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Virac, Catanduanes, Branch 43, dated August 9, 2010, in Election Case No. 55, are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
Petitioner Abelardo Abundo, Sr. is
DECLARED ELIGIBLE for the position of Mayor of Viga, Catanduanes to