Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 1

BERNARDO vs.

ABALOS
G.R. No. 137266. December 5, 2001.

Sandoval-Gutierrez, J.

FACTS: Respondent Benjamin Abalos, Sr. was the mayor of Mandaluyong City and his son,
Benjamin Abalos Jr. was a candidate for city mayor of the same city for the May 1998 elections.
Petitioners herein interposed that respondents conducted an all-expense-free affair at a resort in
Quezon Province for the Mandaluyong City public school teachers, registered voters of the said
city and who are members of the Board of Election Inspectors therein. The said affair was
alleged to be staged as a political campaign for Abalos Jr., where his political jingle was played
all throughout and his shirts being worn by some participants. Moreover, Abalos Sr. also made
an offer and a promise then to increase the allowances of the teachers. In this regard,
petitioners filed a criminal complaint with the COMELEC against Abalos Sr. and Abalos Jr. for
vote-buying, further alleging that they conspired with their co-respondents in violating the
Omnibus Election Code. Pursuant to the recommendation of the Director of the Law Department
of the COMELEC, the COMELEC en banc dismissed the complaint for insufficiency of evidence.
Hence, this petition for certiorari.

ISSUE: Whether the petition before the Supreme Court must be given due course without the
petitioners first submitting a motion for reconsideration before the COMELEC.

HELD: NO. The Court ruled that a petition for certiorari can only be resorted to if there is no
appeal, or any plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. In the instant
case, it was said that filing of the motion for reconsideration before the COMELEC is the most
expeditious and inexpensive recourse that petitioners can avail of as it was intended to give the
COMELEC an opportunity to correct the error imputed to it. As the petitioners then did not
exhaust all the remedies available to them at the COMELEC level, it was held that their instant
petition is certainly premature. Significantly, they have not also raised any plausible reason for
their direct recourse to the Supreme Court. As such, the instant petition was ruled to fail.