1. This case involved an election protest filed by Dumpit challenging Eriguel's victory in the 2007 mayoral race in Agoo, La Union. After reviewing contested ballots, the COMELEC declared Dumpit the winner by 167 votes.
2. Eriguel appealed, arguing the COMELEC violated procedure by conducting a fresh review of ballots without first verifying their integrity.
3. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Eriguel, finding the COMELEC overstepped its jurisdiction and failed to follow proper procedure by transferring the case directly to the Commission en banc instead of having it reviewed by a division first. The COMELEC resolution was set aside.
1. This case involved an election protest filed by Dumpit challenging Eriguel's victory in the 2007 mayoral race in Agoo, La Union. After reviewing contested ballots, the COMELEC declared Dumpit the winner by 167 votes.
2. Eriguel appealed, arguing the COMELEC violated procedure by conducting a fresh review of ballots without first verifying their integrity.
3. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Eriguel, finding the COMELEC overstepped its jurisdiction and failed to follow proper procedure by transferring the case directly to the Commission en banc instead of having it reviewed by a division first. The COMELEC resolution was set aside.
1. This case involved an election protest filed by Dumpit challenging Eriguel's victory in the 2007 mayoral race in Agoo, La Union. After reviewing contested ballots, the COMELEC declared Dumpit the winner by 167 votes.
2. Eriguel appealed, arguing the COMELEC violated procedure by conducting a fresh review of ballots without first verifying their integrity.
3. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Eriguel, finding the COMELEC overstepped its jurisdiction and failed to follow proper procedure by transferring the case directly to the Commission en banc instead of having it reviewed by a division first. The COMELEC resolution was set aside.
FACTS: Petitioner Eriguel and private respondent Dumpit were mayoralty candidates in Agoo, La Union during the May 14, 2007 elections. On May 18, 2007, after the canvassing and counting of votes, Eriguel was proclaimed asthe duly elected mayor of the Municipality of Agoo. Eriguel received 11,803 votes against Dumpit’s 7,899 votes, translating to a margin of 3,904 votes. On May 28, 2007, Dumpit filed an Election Protest before the RTCof Agoo, La Unioncontesting the appreciation and counting of ballots in 152 precincts in Agoo because some of the ballots cast in favor of Eriguel were erroneously counted and appreciated in the latter’s favor despite containing markings and identical symbols. Dumpit also alleged that while a number of ballots containing Eriguel’s name were written by only one (1) person, the same were stillcounted in the latter’s favor. The results of the revision showed that Eriguel had 11,678 votes against Dumpit’s 7,839 votes, or a lead of 3,839 votes. On December 7, 2007, the trial court issued a decision upholding Eriguel’s proclamation because evidences presented by the Protestant are not substantial enough to persuade the Judge of this Court to rule in favor of Protestant. Unsatisfied with the findings, Dumpit appealed to the COMELEC. The case was initially assigned to the Special Second Division composed of Presiding Commissioner Rene V. Sarmiento and Commissioner Nicodemo T. Ferrer. Commissioner Ferrer, however, decided to inhibit himself. This prompted Presiding Commissioner Sarmiento to issue an Order dated July22, 2009 elevating the appeal to the Commission en banc. The transfer of the case to the Commission en banc was apparently made pursuant to COMELEC Rules of Procedure. Thereafter, the Commission en banc proceeded to conduct a fresh appreciation of the contested ballots. On December 9, 2009, after an exhaustive appreciation of all the contested ballots, the Commission en banc promulgated a resolution nullifying 3,711 ballots cast in favor of Eriguel after finding the same to have been written by only one (1)or two (2) persons. On this note, the Commission en banc set aside the RTC’s decision and declared Dumpit as the duly elected mayor of Agoo, La Union, for having garnered 167 more votes than Eriguel. Aggrieved, Eriguel petitioned via certiorari ISSUE Whether the COMELEC en banc’s fresh appreciation of the contested ballots without first ascertaining the integrity thereof violated the doctrine enunciated in Rosal v. Commission on Elections. DECISION However exhaustive the COMELEC’s findings may appear to be the same is still rendered void due to its lack of jurisdiction and its failure to ensure that the integrity of the ballots has been preserved prior to conducting a fresh appreciation thereof. Proper proceedings with the COMELEC must be conducted to answer who between the two candidates was duly elected. Thus, the assailed resolution must be set aside for being procedurally and substantially infirm. COMELEC, in the exercise of its quasi-judicial functions, is bound to follow the provisions set forth in Section 3, Article IX-C of the 1987 Constitution. Thus, when the COMELEC is exercising its quasi-judicial powers, it is constitutionally mandated to decide the case first in division, and En Banc only upon motion for reconsideration. It is the COMELEC division that has original appellate jurisdiction to resolve an appeal to an election protest decided by a trial court. The Special Second Division of the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it immediately transferred to the COMELEC En Banc a case that ought to be heard and decided by a division. The jurisdiction of a court or an agency existing quasi-judicial functions (such as COMELEC) over the subject-matter of an action is conferred only by the Constitution or by law. Jurisdiction cannot be fixed by the agreement of the parties, acquired through, or waived, enlarged or diminished by, any act or omission of the parties. Neither can it be conferred by the acquiescence of the court, more particularly so in election cases where the interest involved transcends those of the contending parties