Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Danilo E. Paras, Commission On Elections,: G.R. No. 123169 November 4, 1996

    Uploaded by

    Aleph Jireh
    34 views15 pages
    This case involves a petition filed by Danilo E. Paras, the incumbent Punong Barangay of Pula, Cabanatuan City, challenging the Commission on Elections' (COMELEC) scheduling of a recall election against him. The COMELEC scheduled the recall election three times based on a petition signed by at least 29.30% of registered voters. Paras argued the recall election violated the Local Government Code, which prohibits recall elections within a year of a regular local election. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sangguniang Kabataan election did not qualify as a regular local election under the Code. It also found Paras' interpretation would undermine the recall provision and contradict the Constitution.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    PARAS-VS.-COMELEC

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case involves a petition filed by Danilo E. Paras, the incumbent Punong Barangay of Pula, Cabanatuan City, challenging the Commission on Elections' (COMELEC) scheduling of a recall election against him. The COMELEC scheduled the recall election three times based on a petition signed by at least 29.30% of registered voters. Paras argued the recall election violated the Local Government Code, which prohibits recall elections within a year of a regular local election. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sangguniang Kabataan election did not qualify as a regular local election under the Code. It also found Paras' interpretation would undermine the recall provision and contradict the Constitution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    34 views15 pages

    Danilo E. Paras, Commission On Elections,: G.R. No. 123169 November 4, 1996

    Uploaded by

    Aleph Jireh
    This case involves a petition filed by Danilo E. Paras, the incumbent Punong Barangay of Pula, Cabanatuan City, challenging the Commission on Elections' (COMELEC) scheduling of a recall election against him. The COMELEC scheduled the recall election three times based on a petition signed by at least 29.30% of registered voters. Paras argued the recall election violated the Local Government Code, which prohibits recall elections within a year of a regular local election. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sangguniang Kabataan election did not qualify as a regular local election under the Code. It also found Paras' interpretation would undermine the recall provision and contradict the Constitution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 15

    DANILO E.

    PARAS, 
    petitioner
    vs.
    COMMISSION ON
    ELECTIONS, 
    respondent

    G.R. No. 123169 November 4, 1996


    FACTS OF THE CASE:

    Petitioner Danilo E. Paras is the incumbent Punong Barangay


    of Pula, Cabanatuan City who won during the last regular barangay
    election in 1994. A petition for his recall as Punong Barangay was
    filed by the registered voters of the barangay.
    Acting on the petition for recall, public respondent Commission
    on Elections (COMELEC) resolved to approve the petition,
    scheduled the petition signing on October 14, 1995, and set the recall
    election on November 13, 1995.
    At least 29.30% of the registered voters signed the petition, well
    above the 25% requirement provided by law.
    The COMELEC, however, deferred the recall election in view of
    petitioner's opposition. On December 6, 1995, the COMELEC set
    anew the recall election, this time on December 16, 1995.
    After conducting a summary hearing, the court dismissed the
    petition and lifted the restraining order.
    In a resolution dated January 5, 1996, the COMELEC, for the
    third time, re-scheduled the recall election an January 13, 1996.
    Hence, this petition for certiorari.
    The petitioner argues that in accordance to Section 74 (b) of
    Republic Act No. 7160, (Local Government Code), which states that
    "no recall shall take place within one (1) year from the date of the
    official's assumption to office or one (1) year immediately preceding
    a regular local election“.
    Petitioner insists that the scheduled January 13, 1996 recall
    election is now barred as the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) election
    was set by Republic Act No. 7808 on the first Monday of May 1996.
    In support thereof, petitioner cites Associated Labor Union v.
    Letrondo-Montejo, 237 SCRA 621, where the Court considered the
    SK election as a regular local election. Petitioner maintains that as
    the SK election is a regular local election, hence no recall election
    can be had for barely four months separate the SK election from the
    recall election.
    ISSUE:
    Whether or not the recall election in question is in violation to the
    provisions of Section 74b of the Local Government Code.
    RULING:
    It is a rule in statutory construction that every part of the statute
    must be interpreted with reference to the context, i.e., that every part
    of the statute must be considered together with the other parts, and
    kept subservient to the general intent of the whole enactment.
    The evident intent of Section 74 is to subject an elective local
    official to recall election once during his term of office. Paragraph
    (b) construed together with paragraph (a) merely designates the
    period when such elective local official may be subject of a recall
    election, that is, during the second year of his term of office. Thus,
    subscribing to petitioner's interpretation of the phrase regular local
    election to include the SK election will unduly circumscribe the
    novel provision of the Local Government Code on recall, a mode of
    removal of public officers by initiation of the people before the end
    of his term.
    And if the SK election which is set by R.A No. 7808 to be held
    every three years from May 1996 were to be deemed within the
    purview of the phrase "regular local election", as erroneously
    insisted by petitioner, then no recall election can be conducted
    rendering inutile the recall provision of the Local Government Code.
    It is likewise a basic precept in statutory construction that a statute
    should be interpreted in harmony with the Constitution.
    Thus, the interpretation of Section 74 of the Local Government
    Code, specifically paragraph (b) thereof, should not be in conflict
    with the Constitutional mandate of Section 3 of Article X of the
    Constitution to "enact a local government code which shall provide
    for a more responsive and accountable local government structure
    instituted through a system of decentralization with effective
    mechanism of recall, initiative, and referendum . . . ."
    Moreover, petitioner's too literal interpretation of the law leads to
    absurdity which we cannot countenance. Thus, in a case, the Court
    made the following admonition:

    “We admonish against a too-literal reading of the law as


    this is apt to constrict rather than fulfill its purpose and
    defeat the intention of its authors. That intention is
    usually found not in "the letter that killeth but in the spirit
    that vivifieth". . .
    The spirit, rather than the letter of a law determines its
    construction; hence, a statute, as in this case, must be read according
    to its spirit and intent.
    ACCORDINGLY, the petition is hereby dismissed for having
    become moot and academic. The temporary restraining order issued
    by the Court on January 12, 1996, enjoining the recall election
    should be as it is hereby made permanent.

    SO ORDERED.
    STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
    Reported by: ABENOJA, Raven Joie G.

    You might also like