G.R. No. L-52413. September 26, 1981
MELITON C. GERONIMO, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND JULIAN C. PENDRE, RESPONDENTS.
MAKASIAR, J.:
This petition for certiorari and mandamus seeks to set
aside the resolution of the respondent Commission on Elections dated January
19, 1980 disqualifying the herein petitioner, Meliton
C. Geronimo, from running for mayor of Baras, Rizal, in the January 30, 1980 local elections, and denying
due course to his certificate of candidacy.
Petitioner Meliton C. Geronimo, a
retired lieutenant colonel of the Philippine Air Force, was a candidate for
mayor under the banner of the Nacionalista Party.
Private respondent Julian C. Pendre was
the secretary of the Kilusang Bagong
Lipunan (KBL) chapter in Baras,
Rizal, and an official candidate of the KBL as member
of the Sangguniang Bayan of
said municipality.
The record shows that on December
31, 1979, herein petitioner wrote three letters addressed to the
chairman of the KBL chapter in Baras, wherein he and
his group manifested their intention to run for the elective positions of
mayor, vice-mayor and members of the Sangguniang Bayan of Baras, Rizal, under the banner of the KBL. The said letters are as follows:
“Katipunan St.
Bgy. San
Jose
Baras,
Rizal
December
31, 1979
“The Chairman
KILUSANG
BAGONG LIPUNAN PARTY (KBL)
Baras
Chapter
Baras,
Rizal
“Dearest Sir:
“Our communication refers to the information that we received
from no less than the Chairman of the Provincial Chapter of the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan Party of Rizal, Honorable
Governor Isidro S. Rodriguez that we are a little bit delayed in applying and
or informing him in entering the race of all elective positions this coming
election, to be held on January 30, 1980.
“In view of the fact our sincerity and intentions to run for
the elective posts mentioned, we appeal for the local KBL Chapter to
reconsider our request to hold in abeyance the proclamation of Mayoral, Vice
Mayoral and members of the Sangguniang Bayan and give due consideration to our appeal, if the KBL
local chapter has already formed and selected the final line-up for the
elective local positions, until finally decided by Arbitration Committee.
“We will therefore await for the
final decision of said committee, and or resolution to that effect.
“With our warmest regards.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MELITON C. GERONIMO
Lt. Col., PAF (Ret.)
cc: The
Provincial Chairman, KBL
Pasig, Metro Manila”
[p. 24, rec.;
underscoring
supplied].
“Katipunan St.
Bgy. San
Jose
Baras,
Rizal
December 31, 1979
“The Chairman
KILUSANG BAGONG
LIPUNAN PARTY (KBL)
Baras
Chapter
Baras,
Rizal
Dearest Sir:
“Enclosed herewith you will find a copy of our formal letter informing
your goodself of our intention and availability as
candidates, with complete line-up down to the Sanggunian
level, under the banner of the KILUSANG BAGONG LIPUNAN PARTY (KBL) our party,
and also in compliance to the suggestion and recommendation our beloved
Governor Rodriguez, in the presence of Secretary Pete Reyes, last December 30,
1979.
“We humbly apologize for the delay of submitting our attached
request to you, in view of the fact that we are not aware or officially
informed that there was already existing Secretariat of our local party,
as a matter of fact, during our inquiry to known leaders of our town, they
cannot inform us who are the leaders of our party or the Secretariat and
it was only during our conference or dialogue with our beloved and respected
Governor Rodriguez, in the presence of Secretary Pete Reyes, informed us that
it was you who is acting Chairman of our local party, KBL and therefore
this will sufficiently the reason of the delay of submitting to you our
availability for the elective post. Further, enclosed herewith is our letter of
application for our candidacy submitted directly to the Provincial Chairman of
our Party, for your reference and information.
“We, extend to you the greetings of the Season and More Power
to you.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MELITON C.
GERONIMO
Lt. Col., PAF (Ret.)
Enclosure (Xerox copy
stated above)
cc: Chairman of the
Provincial KBL
Party” [p.
25, rec.; underscoring
supplied].
“Katipunan St.
Bgy. San
Jose
Baras,
Rizal
December
31, 1979
“The Local Chairman
KILUSANG BAGONG
LIPUNAN PARTY
Baras
Chapter
Baras,
Rizal
“ATTENTION: ATTY.
ALIPIO GOLPEO
Dear Sir:
“This communication refers to our intention to seek the
mayoralty and Vice-mayorship and members of the Sanggunian Bayan of our town, Baras, Rizal, under the KILUSANG
BAGONG LIPUNAN PARTY (KBL).
“We, as loyal members of the former Nacionalista
Party and now loyal party members of the KBL party and concerned
citizens of Baras, Rizal,
wish to inform you officially that as of now we intend declare our candidacy
and availability to run on all local elective posts, hereunder are the declared
candidates for
“Mayor – Lt. Col. Meliton C.
Geronimo
“Vice Mayor – Mr. Rafael S. Ortañez
“Sanggunian Bayan – to be submitted on or before the January 4, 1980.
“In view of the above we therefore request you to submit the abovenamed individuals and final line-up for the Sanggunian Bayan for indorsement and approval of the Provincial Chapter of our
party, the KILUSANG BAGONG LIPUNAN PARTY (KBL). You may be aware of
the fact that no less than the Chairman of the Commission on Elections, has
made it known that active campaign and or intention of any individual to run or
seek any elective posts should move or start their campaign on the 29th of
December, 1979 and therefore in compliance and obedience thereto the
Commission’s Order, we did form our line-up for referral and consideration of
the party, and indorsement to the Provincial Chapter
for its consideration and approval.
“We request of your immediate action required thereat so that
we can act accordingly particularly the requirements, re: filling of the
Certificate of Candidacy before the dateline as required by the Comelec.
“We anticipate for your immediate and personal attention to
our request and greetings of the Season and More Power to You.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MELITON C.
GERONIMO
Lt. Col., PAF (Ret.)”
[p. 26, rec.; italics supplied].
Upon receipt of the aforequoted
letters, the KBL Baras Chapter, through its
secretary, private respondent herein, informed the petitioner on January 3,
1980 that the final and complete lineup of the KBL official candidates had
already been chosen by the local KBL chapter through the Municipal Convention
which was held on December 30, 1979, in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the KBL.
On January 4, 1980,
after his receipt of the aforesaid January
3, 1980 letter of the KBL Baras Chapter
turning down his request to be the official KBL mayoralty candidate, petitioner
filed his certificate of candidacy for the same position under the Nacionalista Party (p. 21, rec.).
On January 9, 1980, herein private respondent filed a petition
with the COMELEC, which was docketed therein as PDC Case No. 23, praying for
the cancellation of the certificate of candidacy of herein petitioner,
respondent therein, and for his disqualification as candidate for the elective
position of mayor on the ground that he had changed party affiliation from the
KILUSANG BAGONG LIPUNAN (KBL) to the Nacionalista
Party in violation of Section 10, Article XII(C) of the 1973 Constitution and
Section 4 of Batas Pambansa Blg.
52. The said petition also sought to cancel the certificate of candidacy of,
and to disqualify, the other members of petitioner’s group from the other
elective municipal positions (Annex B, Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus,
p. 17, rec.). On the same day, herein
private respondent, petitioner therein, filed a supplemental petition with the
COMELEC, docketed as PDC Case No. 23-5 (Annex C, Petition, p. 22, rec.). Then, on January 15, 1980, herein petitioner [respondent therein],
filed an opposition to the petition and supplemental petition of herein private
respondent (Annex D, Petition, p. 30, rec.).
The COMELEC heard the case on January 15, 1980, at which hearing both petitioner and
private respondent presented their evidence.
On January 19, 1980,
the COMELEC issued the challenged resolution declaring thus:
“8305.
(PDC Case No. 23). In the
matter of the verified petition, dated January 8, 1980, and supplemental
petition, dated January 9, 1980, filed by Atty. Pedro N. Belmi
as counsel for petitioner Julian C. Pendre, the
latter being a resident of Poblacion, Baras, Rizal, seeking the
disqualification of the following candidates:
MELITON C. GERONIMO, for Mayor; TEODORICO R. LLAGAS, MARIO M. DUNGCA,
DANILO L. GOLLA, JULIANO MANALO, JR., ANTONIO TESTON, RAYMUNDO J. ORACION, and
PLACIDA FERRERA, all for Members, Sangguniang Bayan of Baras, Rizal, in the January 30, 1980 local elections, on the
ground that they changed their political party affiliation from Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL) to Nacionalista
Party (NP), in violation of Section 10, Article XII(C) of the Constitution and
‘Section 4 of Batas Pambansa Blg.
52′; Considering that from the evidence submitted in this case it appears
that in a letter, December 31, 1979 (Exh. ‘C’ also Exh. ‘1-A’), of
respondent Meliton C. Geronimo, addressed to the
Chairman of the KBL Chapter of Baras, Rizal, he stated among others, that ‘as loyal members of
the former Nacionalista party and now loyal party
members of the KBL party,’ he and his men are seeking
nomination as candidates of the KBL; that this request for
nomination was denied by the KBL Chapter, in a letter of January 3, 1980,
signed by the petitioner (Exh. ‘D’); and that on
January 4, 1980, the respondents herein filed their certificates of candidacy,
stating that they are NP nominees, except Mario M. Dungca,
who did not state anything about his party affiliation or nominated by the NP
Chapter of Rizal on January 4, 1980 (Exh. ‘3’), the Commission, on motion of Commissioner
Vicente M. Santiago Jr., duly seconded, RESOLVED to declare the respondent Meliton C. Geronimo violated the constitutional and
statutory prohibitions of changing party affiliation within six months before
the election and, therefore, he is disqualified to be a candidate (Sec. 4,
Batas Pambansa Blg. 52),
and his certificate of candidacy shall not be given due course (Section 2,
PD 1661, as amended). With respect to
the other respondents, there is no sufficient evidence showing that they
changed their party affiliation from the Liberal Party, as alleged, to the
NP during the prohibited period.
“UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED” (Annex A,
Petition, p. 16, rec.; underscoring supplied).
A motion for reconsideration of the aforequoted
resolution was filed on January 22,
1980 by herein petitioner Meliton C.
Geronimo, respondent therein, praying among others that the order disqualifying
him be reconsidered and that his certificate of candidacy be given due course
(p. 90, rec.). Private respondent Julian
C. Pendre, petitioner therein, filed on January 25, 1980 his opposition to
the said motion (p. 92, rec.).
On January 28, 1980,
without waiting for the resolution of the motion for reconsideration and the
opposition thereto, petitioner filed the instant petition for certiorari
and mandamus with this Court, and secured a restraining order on the
same day directing the COMELEC to refrain from enforcing its January 19, 1980 resolution until
further orders.
Required to answer the petition, respondent COMELEC, represented
by the Solicitor General, and private respondent Julian C. Pendre
filed on February 4, 1980
their respective answers. Also, private
respondent filed on February 7, 1980
with this Court an urgent motion praying for prompt decision of the present
case or that a hearing be set at the earliest time.
The records further reveal that in the local elections of January 30, 1980, petitioner obtained
2,695 votes as against his opponent, the incumbent Mayor Bayani
A. Ferrera, who obtained 2,370 votes, or a margin of 325
votes (p. 104, rec.). During the
canvassing of the election returns in Baras, Rizal, which started in the evening of January 30, 1980,
private respondent herein and the other KBL candidates contested seven (7) out
of the nineteen (19) election returns of voting centers Nos. 8, 9, 12, 14, 15,
15-B and 16.
On February 5, 1980, private respondent and the other KBL
candidates filed a formal petition with the COMELEC for the suspension of the
proclamation of the winning candidates and for the recounting of the ballots in
voting centers Nos. 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 15-B and 16 on account of serious
irregularities discovered in seven (7) out of the nineteen (19) election
returns of the aforementioned voting centers.
On February 12, 1980,
the COMELEC resolved to defer action on the aforesaid petition of private
respondent on the ground that the same was premature and that it should be
consolidated with the appeal from the ruling of the Municipal Board of
Canvassers after the termination of the canvass of election returns.
On February 18, 1980,
the Municipal Board of Canvassers issued a resolution denying the protest of
private respondent and the other KBL candidates against the aforesaid seven (7)
election returns.
Subsequently, on February
22, 1980, private respondent appealed from the resolution of the
Municipal Board of Canvassers to the COMELEC.
Private respondent alleged however, that he has not received any
resolution of the COMELEC on said appeal.
It appears also from the records that on February 19, 1980, petitioner filed a motion
dated February 18, 1980
asking this Court to issue an order to the COMELEC to proclaim him as the
mayor-elect of Baras, Rizal,
and to set the case for hearing. On February 29, 1980, private respondent
filed an answer dated February 28,
1980 to petitioner’s motion.
This Court, in its resolution of February
28, 1980, required the respondents to comment on the petitioner’s
motion asking this Court to issue an order to the COMELEC to proclaim the
petitioner as the mayor-elect of Baras, Rizal. Pursuant
thereto, herein private respondent and respondent COMELEC filed their comments
respectively on March 7, 1980
and March 10, 1980.
Petitioner Meliton C. Geronimo was
proclaimed on February 24, 1980,
which fell on a Sunday, by the Municipal Board of Canvassers of Baras, Rizal, as the elected
municipal mayor. However, the COMELEC, acting on an urgent motion to set aside
the proclamation dated February 25, 1980 filed by herein petitioner, issued
Resolution No. 9308 on February 26, 1980 granting the motion and setting aside
the proclamation made by the Municipal Board of Canvassers of Baras. Upon receipt
of the aforesaid resolution of the COMELEC, petitioner filed on February 28, 1980 an urgent motion to
reconsider the resolution setting aside the proclamation made by the Board of
Canvassers and for the reinstatement of the same.
On March 1, 1980,
herein petitioner attempted to take his oath of office before Governor Isidro
Rodriguez of the Province of Rizal. However, he was not
inducted into office because there was yet no COMELEC resolution reinstating
his proclamation. Instead, on March 3, 1980, petitioner took his
oath of office before Municipal Judge Teodoro O. Pahimulin of Binangonan, Rizal (p. 134, rec.).
On March 11, 1980, the COMELEC issued Resolution No. 9554
reinstating the proclamation made by the Municipal Board of Canvassers of Baras on February 24, 1980 in favor of the petitioner as
the winning candidate for mayor of Baras but the
proclamation shall be temporary and subject to the decision of this Court on
the present case filed by herein petitioner (p. 144, rec.).
The sole issue to be determined in the instant case is whether or
not the respondent Commission on Elections has acted with grave abuse of
discretion in disqualifying petitioner Meliton C.
Geronimo from running for the office of mayor of Baras,
Rizal, and in refusing to give due course to his
certificate of candidacy for the said position.
The matter of disqualification of petitioner Meliton
C. Geronimo is based on Section 10, Article XII(C) of the 1973 Constitution,
declaring that:
“No elective public officer may change his political party
affiliation during his term of office, and no candidate for any elective
public office may change his political party affiliation within six months
immediately preceding or following an election” (underscoring
supplied).
and Batas Pambansa Blg. 52, adopting the
aforesaid constitutional prohibition on political turncoatism
as one of the special disqualifications of local candidates running for
elective positions by providing that:
“Sec. 4. Special
Disqualification. – In addition to violation of Section 10 of Article
XII(C) of the Constitution and disqualifications mentioned in existing laws,
which are hereby declared as disqualifications for any of the elective
officials enumerated in Section 1 hereof xx
x xx.
xx xx xx
“Sec. 7: xx x The
Commission on Elections shall, motu propio, or upon sworn petition of any voter, political
party or candidate, after due notice and hearing, refuse to give due
course to a certificate of candidacy if it is shown that the person filing the
same does not possess all the necessary qualifications for the office concerned
or is disqualified from running for said office as provided by law”
(underlining supplied).
as well as
Presidential Decree No. 1661, as amended, implementing the aforecited
constitutional provision and providing that:
“Section 1. Guest Candidate.
– It shall be unlawful for any registered or accredited political party to
nominate and or support as its official candidate any person belonging to
another accredited or registered party when he has affiliated with the
nominating party at least six (6) months before the election x x x.
“Section 2. Sanction.
– The Commission on Elections shall not give due course to a certificate of
candidacy filed by a guest candidate or to the nomination of a political party
of a ticket which includes a guest candidate.”
Petitioner contends that KBL is not a political party, so that he
could not have affiliated with the KBL as a political party, and he could not
have changed party affiliation from the KBL to NP; consequently, he is not
guilty of violating the constitutional and statutory prohibitions on turncoatism and he should not be disqualified from running
for the office of mayor of Baras, Rizal.
The contention is without merit.
Petitioner, in arguing that KBL is not a political party but a mere
political movement or an umbrella organization, relied on the case of Laban vs. COMELEC (82 SCRA 196 [1978]) where this Court
held that KBL is not a political party. However, political developments
subsequent to the LABAN case showed that KBL was transformed from a mere temporary
alliance into a more or less stable political organization. It bears noting, as it is significant, that
in the Interim Batasang Pambansa,
majority of the assemblymen are identified and identify themselves with pride
as KBL members, sporting T-shirts, hats, pins labelled
KBL, while the few opposition die-hards identify themselves as members of the
NP or Pusyon Bisaya. Thereafter, until December, 1979, the
majority members kept referring to themselves as KBL members. Likewise, the KBL
members held caucuses and meetings, to discuss vital issues. The actuations of these organizers and
leading members established the de facto organization of the KBL
since April, 1978. And the acts
performed by the KBL leaders, not the formality of registration as a party,
should determine the commencement of party existence. In like manner, in cases involving illegal
associations, the nature and true character of an organization are oftentimes
determined by the speeches and activities of its leaders and members rather
than by its constitution and by-laws (People vs. Ramos, CA-G.R. No. 5318,
December 28, 1940, 40 O.G. 2305 [Sept. 13, 1941]).
Moreover, Section 80 of the 1965 Election Code and Section 22 of
the 1971 Election Code defined apolitical party as “an organized group of
persons pursuing the same political ideals in a government and includes its
branches, and divisions.” The 1978 Election Code adopted the aforequoted definition by providing in Section 199 that
“any other group of persons pursuing the same political ideals in
government may register with the Commission and be entitled to the same rights
and privileges.” Evidently, the KBL is composed of persons committed to
the same political ideals and is therefore considered a political party under
the aforementioned definition. As such,
it was later duly accredited as a political party separate from the Nacionalista Party pursuant to Batas Pambansa
Blg. 53 which became effective on December 22, 1979,
providing in Section 1 thereof that “for the purpose of such accreditation
a political party shall include political groups, aggrupations,
organizations or associations of persons pursuing the same political ideals in
government,” and COMELEC Resolution No. 1406 promulgated also on December
22, 1979, providing for the rules on the accreditation of political
parties. And this Court has likewise
declared: “That KBL had always been
a political party or aggrupation can, therefore, no
longer be open to question. Were KBL not
such a political party, block voting as was declared valid in the case of
Peralta vs. COMELEC could not have been availed of by it, as it unquestionably
did, in the 1978 elections. For block voting is voting
for a political party” (Santos vs. COMELEC, L-52390, March 31, 1981). Similarly, in the cases of Gabatan vs. COMELEC (L-52381, January 26, 1980) and Evasco vs. COMELEC (L-52401, Resolution of January 28,
1980), this Court affirmed the disqualification of the candidates for the local
elective positions of Pagsanjan and Liliw, both in Laguna, on the ground that they changed
party affiliation from the KBL to the Nacionalista
Party within six months immediately preceding the January 30, 1980 local
elections, and in effect recognizing the existence of the KBL as a political
party since April, 1978. Therefore, the
status of KBL as a political party is now unquestionably a political reality.
There is no question as to petitioner’s affiliation with the KBL
as a political party. For it is clear
from the aforequoted undisputed December 31, 1979 letters of the petitioner to
the chairman of the KBL Baras Chapter, that indeed he
was affiliated with the KBL. This is
confirmed by his statement in one of the aforequoted
letters that “now loyal party members of the KBL party” he and his
men are seeking nomination as candidates for mayor, vice-mayor and members of
the Sangguniang Bayan of Baras, Rizal, to run “under
the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan Party (KBL).” This is an express recognition
of KBL as a political party and an admission of petitioner’s affiliation with
it. He even went further by requesting
that his list be submitted “for indorsement and
approval of the Provincial Chapter of our party, the KILUSANG BAGONG LIPUNAN
PARTY (KBL).” In another letter, petitioner appealed to the local KBL
Chapter to hold in abeyance the proclamation of candidates for the elective
local positions “if the KBL local chapter has already formed and selected
the final line-up for the elective local positions, until finally decided by
Arbitration Committee,” thus manifesting his fervent desire to be the
official candidate for mayor of Baras under the
banner of the KBL. Moreover, those aforequoted letters were profuse with references to KBL as
“our party.” This persistent open declaration by petitioner of KBL as
“our party” can only suggest his affiliation with the KBL.
It must be pointed out also that the petitioner made a
categorical admission in his own petition for certiorari and mandamus
that he “was a member of the KBL,” but offered the lame excuse that
“he never thought of it as a political party” (p. 5, Petition for Certiorari
and Mandamus, p. 5, rec.). This
personal belief cannot prevail over the clear manifestations of his adherence
to the KBL as a political party as established by his three aforementioned
letters. In addition, during the hearing
of the case on January 15, 1980 before the COMELEC, petitioner, through
counsel, admitted being a member of the KBL before he filed his certificate of
candidacy (pp. 53, 109, rec.). It could
hardly be argued then that petitioner was not affiliated with the KBL as a
political party.
There being a clear showing of petitioner’s affiliation with the
KBL as a political party on December 31, 1979 as fully established by his three
aforequoted letters and his admissions by himself or
through his counsel in his pleadings and at the hearing before the COMELEC, and
having subsequently affiliated with the Nacionalista
Party as shown by his certificate of candidacy for municipal mayor of Baras, subscribed and sworn to on January 4, 1980 and indisputably
filed on the same date, within six months immediately preceding the January 30,
1980 local elections, his political turncoatism is
undeniable, thus warranting his disqualification as a candidate for the office
of mayor of Baras, Rizal. This turncoatism is
made more despicable by the fact that petitioner filed on January 4, 1980 his
certificate of candidacy as a Nacionalista Party
mayoralty candidate only after his request to be the official KBL mayoralty
candidate was denied on January 3, 1980 by the local KBL chapter because it had
already chosen the official candidates of the KBL for the municipality of Baras.
If his change of political color were due to honest disagreement
on principles with KBL leaders, his act would have the aura of noble
heroism. But his turncoatism
is sheer opportunism because his change of party loyalty was simply due to the
fact that he was not chosen the official candidate of the KBL.
WE cannot likewise subscribe to the argument of the petitioner
that the prohibition in Section 10, Article XII(C) of the 1973 Constitution
against changing party affiliation should not apply to the January 30, 1980
local elections because the holding of the elections was declared barely a
month before the election date. For We
have already held that “the constitutional provision against ‘political turncoatism‘ already in force upon the effectivity
of the New Constitution more than seven years ago, is clearly intended to apply
to all elections held under its regime, regardless of whether the holding of
said elections is declared less than the 6-month period mentioned in the
provision. The stance taken by
petitioner that it should not apply in the last election the holding of which
was announced only a month before, is clearly not
tenable, even only under the well-known legal maxim that where the law does not
distinguish, We should not distinguish.
No right constitutionally protected under the due process clause is
involved for petitioner to complain against lack of sufficient notice because
of the less than six (6) months intervening between the declaration of the
holding of an election and the day of election.
The Constitution speaks so unequivocally with its innovative and
mandatory provision, obedience thereof must be imposed” (Santos
vs. COMELEC, supra).
Petitioner furthermore assails P.D. No. 1661 as ex post
facto law if applied to him; hence, unconstitutional. The prohibition of ex post facto
law has been unquestionably known as applicable only to laws or statutes which are
penal in nature. WE have already ruled
in the Santos case, supra, that the aforesaid P.D. No. 1661 cannot
“be banned under the ex post facto law clause of the
Constitution, for it merely provides for a certain disqualification of a
candidate aspiring to be chosen to an elective office which, being a mere
privilege, is a fit subject for reasonable statutory regulation, clearly not
penal in character. As
defined, ex post facto law is limited in its scope only to
matters criminal in nature.” Besides, P.D. No. 1661 which took
effect on January 3, 1980,
is only an implementation of Section 10, Article XII(C) of the 1973
Constitution and the same decree was likewise held in the aforecited
Santos case as having a prospective
application contrary to the claim of the petitioner that it is retroactive in
application. Petitioner ought to have been forewarned as early as 1973, that
there was already a constitutional prohibition against turncoatism
and having violated the same, he should now bear the consequence of his
actions.
Petitioner should also be reminded that in exercising his
political rights, he should at all times act in good
faith, especially because he is a retired lieutenant colonel of the Philippine
Air Force and a businessman. Article 19
of the New Civil Code expressly mandates that “every person must, in
the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with
justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith”
(underscoring supplied). In the case at
bar, petitioner acted in gross and evident bad faith in changing his political
party affiliation from the KBL of which he was a party member, to the Nacionalista Party, immediately after the KBL Baras Chapter denied his request to be the official KBL
candidate for municipal mayor, for the reason that it had already chosen the
complete line-up of the KBL official candidates pursuant to its party
rules. Such opportunistic and therefore
contemptible attitude of the petitioner should not be tolerated. For Section 10, Article XII(C) of the 1973
Constitution was adopted primarily to stop the “virus of turncoatism” and political opportunism. Otherwise, it would defeat or render
meaningless the very purpose for which the aforesaid novel constitutional
provision was adopted.
WE find therefore that there was no grave abuse of discretion
committed by the respondent COMELEC in issuing the challenged resolution disqualifying
petitioner Geronimo from running as NP candidate for the position of mayor of Baras, Rizal, and refusing to give
due course to his certificate of candidacy by reason of violation of the
afore-quoted constitutional and statutory provisions expressly prohibiting turncoatism, since there was substantial evidence in
support of the same. And in the absence
of patent and grave abuse of discretion, We cannot set
aside the COMELEC resolution complained of (Aratuc
vs. Commission on Elections, 88 SCRA 251 [1979]).
Finally, it must be noted that there is merit in private
respondent’s contention that the instant case be dismissed for being premature
as there was a motion for reconsideration of the questioned resolution No. 8305
filed by petitioner with respondent COMELEC which was still pending at the time
of the filing of the instant petition.
However, in view of the nature of this case requiring as it does a
speedy and prompt disposition of the issues involved in order to determine the
party legally entitled to the position of mayor, We
opted to decide once and for all the issues involved herein.
WHEREFORE, THE PETITION IS HEREBY DISMISSED AND THE
RESTRAINING ORDER OF JANUARY 28, 1980
IS HEREBY LIFTED. NO COSTS.
Fernando, C.J., Barredo, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr.,
Fernandez, Guerrero, De Castro, and Melencio-Herrera, concur.
Abad Santos, J., no part.
Teehankee, J., on official leave.