This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2016-01-19 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| First, the COMELEC Law Department's "ruling" was issued only after the filing of petitioner's COC. Second, with respect to the denial of due course to James L. Engle's COC as a nominee of Lakas-CMD and to petitioner's COC as his substitute, the COMELEC Law Department's letter is not binding and at most, recommendatory. It is settled in jurisprudence that the denial of due course or cancellation of one's COC is not within the administrative powers of the COMELEC, but rather calls for the exercise of its quasi-judicial functions.[22] We have also previously held that the COMELEC, in the exercise of its adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers, is mandated by the Constitution to hear and decide such cases first by Division and, upon motion for reconsideration, by the En Banc.[23] In resolving cases to deny due course to or cancel certificates of candidacy, the COMELEC cannot merely rely on the recommendations of its Law Department but must conduct due proceedings through one of its divisions.[24] Returning to the case at bar, the COMELEC Second Division only formally ruled on the status of James L. Engle as an independent candidate and the invalidity of petitioner's substitution on July 5, 2013, months after the May 13, 2013 Elections. | |||||