Damasen V Tumamao
Damasen V Tumamao
G.R. No. 173165, February 17, 2010 Facts: A permanent vacancy occurred in the office of the Vice Mayor of San Isidro, Isabella when incumbent Vice-Mayor Nelia Tumamao died on December 2, 2004. Pursuant to Sec. 44 of RA 7160, Ligaya Alonzo, the highest ranking member of the Sangguniang Bayan was elevated to the position. To fill the ensuing vacancy in the Sangguinang Bayan, Mayor Lim recommended to Governor Padaca the appointment of Oscar Tumamao, also a member of LDP. Tumamao was appointed, took his oath and attended sessions. On May 2005, Atty. Lucky Damasen, became a member of LDP and got hold of a letter of nomination to the Sanggunian Bayan from provincial chairman of LDP Balauag addressed to Governor Padaca. He was appointed to SB and took his oath. Damasen attended sessions but he was not recognized. He filed a petition for quo warranto with prayer for writ of preliminary injunction against Tumamao with the RTC, seeking to be declared the rightful member of the SB. As part of his defense, Tumamao presented Atty. Ernest Soberano who identified a letter dated June 14, 2005, signed by LDP Provincial Chairman Balauag, which states that the latter was revoking her nomination of Damasen, and that she was confirming Tumamaos nomination made by Mayor Lim. Later, Tumamao presented Provincial Chairman Balauag who affirmed the contents of her letter revoking the nomination of Damasen. RTC ruled in favor of Damasen. Tumamao appealed the RTC Decision to the Court of Appeals. The CA held that Damasen was not entitled to assume the vacant position in the Sangguniang Bayan. Issue: Who, between Damasen and Tumamao, is entitled to the contested position? Held: Tumamao is entitled to the contested position. It is undisputed that the law applicable to herein petition is Sec. 45 (b) of RA 7160, which provides for the rule on succession in cases of permanent vacancies in the Sanggunian. As can be gleaned from Sec. 45, the law provides for conditions for the rule of succession to apply: First, the appointee shall come from the same political party as that of the Sanggunian member who caused the vacancy. Second, the appointee must have a nomination and a Certificate of Membership from the highest official of the political party concerned. The reason behind the right given to a political party to nominate a replacement where a permanent vacancy occurs in the Sanggunian is to maintain the party representation as willed by the people in the election. Since the permanent vacancy in the Sanggunian occurred because of the elevation of LDP member Alonzo to vice-mayor, it follows that the person to succeed her should also belong to the LDP so as to preserve party representation. Thus, this Court cannot countenance Damasens insistence in clinging to an appointment when he is in fact not a bona fide member of the LDP. While the revocation of the nomination given to Damasen came after the fact of his appointment, this Court cannot rule in his favor, because the very first requirement of Sec. 45 (b) is that the appointee must come from the political party as that of the Sanggunian member who caused the vacancy. To stress, Damasen is not a bona fide member of the LDP. In addition, appointing Damasen would not serve the will of the electorate. He himself admits that he was
previously a member of the Lakas-CMD, and that he ran for the position of Mayor under the said party on the May 2004 Elections. Likewise, he did not resign from the said party when he joined the LDP, and even admitted that his joining the LDP was not because of party ideals, but because he just wanted to. How can the will of the electorate be best served, given the foregoing admissions of Damasen? If this Court were to grant herein petition, it would effectively diminish the party representation of the LDP in the Sanggunian, as Damasen would still be considered a member of the Lakas -CMD, not having resigned therefrom, a scenario that defeats the purpose of the law, and that ultimately runs contrary the ratio of Navarro. What is damning to the cause of Damasen, is the letter of Demaree J.B. Raval, the Deputy Secretary Counsel of the LDP, addressed to Governor Padaca wherein it is categorically stated that Damasen is not a bona fide member of the LDP. This Court has no reason to doubt the veracity of the letter coming from the LDP leadership. Quite clearly, from the tenor of the letter, it appears that the membership of Damasen still had to be approved by the LDP National Council. Thus, notwithstanding Damasens procurement of a Certificate of Membership from LDP Provincial Chairman Balauag, to this Courts mind, the same merely started the process of his membership in the LDP, and it did not mean automatic membership thereto. While it may be argued that Damasen was already a member upon receipt of a Certificate of Membership from LDP Provincial Chairman Balauag, this Court cannot impose such view on the LDP. If the LDP leadership says that the membership of Damasen still had to be endorsed to the National Council for approval, then this Court cannot question such requirement in the absence of evidence to the contrary. It is well settled that the discretion of accepting members to a political party is a right and a privilege, a purely internal matter, which this Court cannot meddle in. Lastly, the records of the case reveal that Tumamao has the nomination of Senator Edgardo J. Angara, the Party Chairman and, therefore, the highest official of the LDP. In addition, he is a member in good standing of the LDP. Thus, given the foregoing, it is this Courts view that Tumamao has complied with the requirements of law.