Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 204 views

    Gallardo Vs Tabamo

    Uploaded by

    Jem Pagantian
    This case involves a petition seeking to prohibit a trial court from exercising jurisdiction over a case involving alleged violations of the Omnibus Election Code. The Supreme Court ruled that jurisdiction over cases involving election laws is exclusively granted to the Commission on Elections based on both the Constitution and statutes. The acts sought to be restrained in the case before the trial court fell within COMELEC's exclusive jurisdiction. Additionally, the Constitution provides COMELEC with broad powers to investigate and prosecute election law violations and serve as guardian of the right to suffrage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Gallardo Vs Tabamo

    Uploaded by

    Jem Pagantian
    204 views2 pages
    This case involves a petition seeking to prohibit a trial court from exercising jurisdiction over a case involving alleged violations of the Omnibus Election Code. The Supreme Court ruled that jurisdiction over cases involving election laws is exclusively granted to the Commission on Elections based on both the Constitution and statutes. The acts sought to be restrained in the case before the trial court fell within COMELEC's exclusive jurisdiction. Additionally, the Constitution provides COMELEC with broad powers to investigate and prosecute election law violations and serve as guardian of the right to suffrage.

    Original Description:

    Digest

    Original Title

    Gallardo vs Tabamo

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a petition seeking to prohibit a trial court from exercising jurisdiction over a case involving alleged violations of the Omnibus Election Code. The Supreme Court ruled that jurisdiction over cases involving election laws is exclusively granted to the Commission on Elections based on both the Constitution and statutes. The acts sought to be restrained in the case before the trial court fell within COMELEC's exclusive jurisdiction. Additionally, the Constitution provides COMELEC with broad powers to investigate and prosecute election law violations and serve as guardian of the right to suffrage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    204 views2 pages

    Gallardo Vs Tabamo

    Uploaded by

    Jem Pagantian
    This case involves a petition seeking to prohibit a trial court from exercising jurisdiction over a case involving alleged violations of the Omnibus Election Code. The Supreme Court ruled that jurisdiction over cases involving election laws is exclusively granted to the Commission on Elections based on both the Constitution and statutes. The acts sought to be restrained in the case before the trial court fell within COMELEC's exclusive jurisdiction. Additionally, the Constitution provides COMELEC with broad powers to investigate and prosecute election law violations and serve as guardian of the right to suffrage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Gallardo vs.

    Tabamo
    ANTONIO GALLARDO, ANTONIO AREVALO, CRESENCIO ECHAVES, EMMANUEL
    ARANAS, PALERMO SIA, RONNIE RAMBUYON, PRIMO NAVARRO, AND NOEL
    NAVARRO VS. HON. SINFOROSO V. TABAMO, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS
    PRESIDING JUDGE OF BRANCH 28 OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF
    MAMBAJAO, CAMIGUIN, AND PEDRO P. ROMUALDO
    G.R. No. 104848, January 29, 1993

    FACTS:
    This is a petition for certiorari and prohibition under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of
    Court. Petitioners would have us prohibit, restrain and enjoin public respondent Sinforoso
    V. Tabamo, Jr., Presiding Judge of Branch 28 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
    Mambajao, Camiguin, from continuing with the proceedings in a petition for injunction,
    prohibition and mandamus with a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction and restraining
    order filed as a taxpayer’s suit, docketed therein as Special Civil Action No. 465 and
    entitled "Pedro P. Romualdo, Jr. versus Gov. Antonio Gallardo, et al." Petitioners likewise
    seek to prohibit the enforcement of the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), issued by
    the respondent Judge on 10 April 1992, on the ground that the latter acted whimsically,
    capriciously and without jurisdiction when he took cognizance of the case and issued the
    said order because the case principally involves an alleged violation of the provisions of
    the Omnibus Election Code the jurisdiction over which is exclusively vested in the
    Commission on Elections (COMELEC). It is additionally averred that the action is
    completely baseless, that the private respondent is not a real party in interest and that the
    public respondent acted with undue haste, manifest partiality and evident bias in favor of
    the private respondent in issuing the Temporary Restraining Order.

    ISSUE:
    Whether the trial court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of Special Civil Action No.
    465

    RULING:
    Needless to say, the acts sought to be restrained in Special Civil Action No. 465 before
    the court a quo are matters falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commission.
    Moreover, the present Constitution also invests the Commission with the power to
    "investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of election laws,
    including acts or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices.

    Indeed, the present Constitution envisions a truly independent Commission on Elections


    committed to ensure free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections, and to serve
    as the guardian of the people's sacred right of suffrage -- the citizenry’s vital weapon in
    effecting a peaceful change of government and in achieving and promoting political
    stability.

    Additionally, by statutory mandate, the present Commission on Elections possesses, inter


    alia, the following powers:
    "1) Exercise direct and immediate supervision and control over national and local officials
    or employees, including members of any national or local law enforcement agency and
    instrumentality of the government required by law to perform duties relative to the conduct
    of elections. In addition, it may authorize CMT cadets eighteen years of age and above
    to act as its deputies for the purpose of enforcing its orders.

    The Commission may relieve any officer or employee referred to in the preceding
    paragraph from the performance of his duties relating to electoral processes who violates
    the election law or fails to comply with its instructions, orders, decisions or rulings, and
    appoint his substitute. Upon recommendation of the Commission, the corresponding
    proper authority shall suspend or remove from office any or all of such officers or
    employees who may, after due process, be found guilty of such violation or failure.

    2) To stop any illegal election activity, or confiscate, tear down, and stop any unlawful,
    libelous, misleading or false election propaganda, after due notice and hearing.”

    The present Constitution upgraded to a constitutional status the aforesaid statutory


    authority to grant the Commission on Elections broader and more flexible powers to
    effectively perform its duties and to insulate it further from legislative intrusions.
    Doubtless, if its rule-making power is made to depend on statutes, Congress may
    withdraw the same at any time.

    You might also like