[G.R. No. 152632. July 23, 2002]
ABAO & TIPON vs. COMELEC & VALDEZ
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your
information, is a resolution of this Court dated 23 JUL 2002.
G.R. No.
152632 (Shim Abao and Roger Tipon,
Petitioners, vs. Commission on Elections and Luzviminda Valdez, Respondents.)
For
resolution is petitioners’ motion for clarification of this Court’s Resolution
dated April 16, 2002 quoted as follows:
“G.R. No. 152632 (Shim Abao and Roger Tipon vs. Commission on Elections and Luzviminda Valdez) -The Court NOTED WITHOUT ACTION, the special civil action for certiorari and mandamus, filed by counsel for the petitioner, considering that this case was already dismissed in the resolution of 2 April 2002.”
After the
national and local elections on May 14, 2001, petitioners Shim Abao and Roger
Tipon, as registered voters of Bacolod City, filed a petition with the
Commission on Elections (COMELEC), docketed as SPA No. 01-256 entitled “Shim Abao, Robert Ragor and Rogelio Tipon,
Petitioners, vs. Luzviminda Valdez, Respondents,” seeking to disqualify
private respondent Luzviminda Valdez as mayoralty candidate for the same city.
On July
31, 2001, pending resolution of the petition of Abao and Tipon, Evelio
Leonardia, one of the mayoralty candidates, filed with the COMELEC a petition for intervention praying for
the annulment of the proclamation of Luzviminda Valdez and declaring him as the
duly elected mayor of Bacolod City.
Without acting on Leonardia’s petition for intervention,
the COMELEC (First Division), on September 10, 2001, issued an Order in SPA No.
01-256 dismissing the petition for disqualification for insufficiency of
evidence. Abao and Tipon filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied by
the COMELEC En Banc in its Resolution
dated February 1, 2002.
On March
4, 2002, Evelio Leonardia filed with this Court a manifestation and motion
expressing his intention to lodge a petition for certiorari[1]
assailing the COMELEC’s Order dated September 10, 2001 and Resolution dated
February 1, 2002 dismissing the petition of Abao and Tipon for disqualification
of Valdez and S praying for an extension of fifteen (15) days within which to
file his petition (G.R. No. 152225, entitled “Shim Abao and Roger Tipon, Petitioners, vs. COMELEC and Luzviminda
Valdez, Respondents,”).
For lack
of personality to file a petition for certiorari, this Court, in a Resolution
dated April 2, 2002 in G.R. No. 152225, denied Leonardia’s manifestation and
motion since “the main action (petition
for disqualification) having ceased to exist, there is no pending proceeding
whereon intervention may be based”.[2]
On April
11, 2002, Abao and Tipon filed with this Court a petition for certiorari,
docketed as G.R. No. 152632,
questioning the COMELEC’s Order dismissing their petition for the
disqualification of Valdez. Since the title of this petition is also “Shim Abao and Roger Tipon, Petitioners, vs.
COMELEC and Luzviminda Valdez, Respondents” (G.R. No. 152225), this Court,
in a Resolution dated April 16, 2002, noted without action the said petition
since it was already dismissed on April 2, 2002. It must be emphasized at this
juncture that what this Court DENIED
was Leonardia’s manifestation and motion in G.R. No. 152225, not the petition
of Abao and Tipon in G.R. No. 152632.
Thus, on May
27, 2002, petitioners filed the instant motion for clarification of this
Court’s Resolution dated April 16, 2002 dismissing the petition in G.R. No.
152632.
Meanwhile,
on June 25, 2002, this Court dismissed Leonardia’s petition in G.R. No. 152225.
Petitioners’
motion for clarification is well taken.
The root
of the confusion was Leonardia’s filing Of his motion and manifestation, and
later, his petition for certiorari erroneously titled “Shim Abao and Roger Tipon, Petitioners, vs. COMELEC and Luzviminda
Valdez, Respondents.” This petition, as earlier mentioned, was dismissed by
this Court on June 25, 2002. This
created the impression that the petition of Abao and Tipon in G.R. No. 152632
and Leonardia’s petition in G.R. No. 152225 are the same.
At any
rate, we also DISMISS the instant
petition for certiorari in G.R. No. 152632 for failure of Abao and Tipon to
attach to their petition the duplicate original or certified true copies of the
assailed COMELEC Order dated September 10, 2001 and Resolution of February 1,
2002.[3]
And even if the petition is not defective in form, we find, after an
examination of their allegations in the petition, that the COMELEC, in issuing
the questioned Order and Resolution, did not commit any grave abuse of
discretion.
WHEREFORE, the motion is GRANTED. G.R. No. 152632 is likewise DISMISSED. Davide, Jr., C.J., is on leave.
Very truly yours,
LUZVIMINDA
D. PUNO
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA