Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4.5 Roces v. HRET

    Uploaded by

    Zepht Badilla
    72 views1 page
    The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) regarding an election protest filed by Harry Ang Ping against Miles Roces. The HRET has sole authority over election contests involving House representatives. Ang Ping was allowed to file the protest despite earlier being disqualified by COMELEC, as the COMELEC resolutions violated his right to due process. The Supreme Court found no grave abuse of discretion by the HRET.

    Original Description:

    CD

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) regarding an election protest filed by Harry Ang Ping against Miles Roces. The HRET has sole authority over election contests involving House representatives. Ang Ping was allowed to file the protest despite earlier being disqualified by COMELEC, as the COMELEC resolutions violated his right to due process. The Supreme Court found no grave abuse of discretion by the HRET.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    72 views1 page

    4.5 Roces v. HRET

    Uploaded by

    Zepht Badilla
    The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) regarding an election protest filed by Harry Ang Ping against Miles Roces. The HRET has sole authority over election contests involving House representatives. Ang Ping was allowed to file the protest despite earlier being disqualified by COMELEC, as the COMELEC resolutions violated his right to due process. The Supreme Court found no grave abuse of discretion by the HRET.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    TITLE: Roces v.

    HRET
    G.R. NO. 167499 DATE: September 15, 2005
    PONENTE: TOPIC: HRET is the sole judge of all contest relating to
    the election, returns, and qualifications of their
    respective members
    FACTS OF THE CASE:
    Petitioner Miles Roces and former Congressman Harry Ang Ping (Mr. Ang Ping) filed Certificate of Candidacies
    (COCs) for the Representative for the 3rd Congressional District of Manila for the 2004 Elections. Mr. Ang Ping was
    disqualified due to an Alejandro Gomez’s petition on the ground that Ang Ping misrepresented himself to be a
    natural-born citizen. COMELEC First Division Commissioner Garcillano of the issued an order for a resolution to
    promulgate the decision, however, it was deferred by Commissioner Resurreccion for lack of quorum. Concurrently,
    Mr. Ang Ping submitted his withdrawal from the elections with his wife, Ma. Zenaida Ang Ping (Mrs. Ang Ping)
    replacing him per the recommendation of his political party.

    Mr. Ang Ping then filed an Election Protest Ad Cautelam with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal
    (HRET) while the COMELEC dismissed the resolution in view of the pending HRET protest, which eventually
    became just a regular protest which was granted. Roces then filed a motion to dismiss which was denied on the
    ground that Mr. Ang Ping was a proper party to file a protest against Roces. This prompted Roces to elevate the
    case to the Supreme Court.

    STATEMENT OF ISSUE/S:
    Whether or not the HRET committed grave abuse of discretion regarding their decision
    HOLDING
    NO. First, HRET is the sole judge of all contest relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective
    members as per Section 17, Article VI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, hence, the HRET has exclusive
    jurisdiction over the case. When Roces also provided the COMELEC’s resolutions as evidence, it was to attest Mr.
    Ang Ping’s standing as a candidate, and not to his standing as a petitioner for the election protest. Furthermore,
    the COMELEC’s resolutions was declared void ab initio as their decision violated Mr. Ang Ping’s right to due
    process when the COMELEC did not give Mr. Ang Ping the opportunity to be heard.

    You might also like